document

the barrister

Morals and MoneyMoney is the root of all evil is

a phrase that we often hear

and, although a truncation of

the Biblical quotation, it is a

thought that can still trouble

savers and investors with

moral concerns.

Personal Finance& Wealth

Management Supplement

27page

Tax Shelters

When investing, it pays to

keep the taxman from taking

his cut wherever possible.

Fortunately there are a

number of legitimate tax

shelters available, so it is

well worth spending some

time understanding these and

deciding whether they are

appropriate for you.

3page

Taxing Times Ahead?

Whilst in relative terms it is

still early in the tax year, it

is never too early to start

thinking about mitigating

and reducing the level of

contribution you and your

family have to make to the

Treasury coffers

page

6

personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007Brewin Dolphin Securities Ltd. is a member of the London Stock Exchange, authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

At Brewin Dolphin we combine the traditionalvalues of personal service and enduringrelationships with today’s most sophisticatedinvestment techniques, research and portfolioanalysis. We offer an individual approach,regardless of portfolio size, leaving you toconcentrate on the finer things in life.

Group Offices: Aberdeen Belfast Birmingham Bradford Cardiff Cheltenham Dorchester Dumfries Dundee Eastbourne

Edinburgh Elgin Exeter Glasgow Guernsey Hereford Inverness Jersey Leeds Leicester Lincoln Llandudno London

Lymington Manchester Marlborough Newcastle Norwich Oxford Reigate Scarborough Stoke-on-Trent Taunton Teesside York

Tel 0845 213 1000

Web www.brewindolphin.co.uk

An investmentportfolio service

that is as individualas you are.

Barrister_Personal_Finance_A4_5mmbleed_Aug07:Layout 1 16/08/2007 09:45 Page 1

3personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007

e

n

k

When investing, it pays to keep the taxman from taking his

cut wherever possible. Fortunately there are a number of

legitimate tax shelters available, so it is well worth spending

some time understanding these and deciding whether they are appropriate

for you.

Contrary to popular belief, tax shelters are not investments in their own

right. They are best thought of as ‘wrappers’ which surround specific types

of investment and confer a tax advantage. For example, when you buy a

‘Stocks & Shares’ ISA you are buying an underlying investment, such as a

unit trust, within an ISA wrapper. This means it is imperative you choose

(and monitor) the underlying investment carefully – tax benefits could

soon be eroded if you buy a mediocre investment. You should also ensure

you are comfortable with any investment risk.

Mainstream Tax Shelters

These are the tax shelters you are most likely to encounter, in fact you

probably already own one or more:

Personal Equity Plans (PEPs) and Individual Savings Accounts (ISAs)

Tax benefit: No tax on gains or interest. No further tax on dividends.

Allowance: ISA £7,000, of which up to £3,000 may be in cash.

PEPs were introduced in 1987, providing a tax-efficient way to own equities.

ISAs effectively replaced them in 1999. Investors can hold cash, equity,

fixed interest and commercial property funds. The dividend tax saving was

reduced in 1999 and removed in April 2004, although higher rate taxpayers

have no further tax to pay and interest remains tax-free. From April 2008

the annual allowance will increase to £7,200, of which up to half may be

held in cash.

Pensions

Tax benefit: Tax relief on contributions. No tax on gains or interest. 25% of

the fund may be taken tax-free at retirement.

Allowance: The lower of annual earnings and £225,000.

Personal Pensions have traditionally seen excellent tax breaks marred

by poor life company investment management and exorbitant charges

(often to fund high sales commissions). Fortunately the pension world is

rapidly changing and cost effective Self-Invested Personal Pensions (SIPPs),

providing far greater investment choice, are now a reality. Stakeholder

pensions can also be well worthwhile for smaller contributions.

Index-Linked National Savings Certificates

Tax benefit: Tax-free interest paid at maturity.

Allowance: £15,000 per issue.

National Savings Certificates come in two flavours: fixed rate and index-

linked. The latter are attractive as they ensure savings will beat inflation

over either three or five years. The current five year I-L Certificates (42nd

Issue) pay RPI & 1.35% tax-free p.a. Assuming RPI remains around 3-4%, the

rate should continue to look very attractive versus conventional savings

accounts for higher rate taxpayers, thanks to the tax-free returns.

Offshore Bank Accounts

Tax benefit: Ability to defer payment of income tax on interest received

Allowance: unlimited

UK tax residents must declare, and pay tax on, interest earned from offshore

bank accounts via their annual tax return. The notion that no tax is due if

the interest is not remitted to the UK is a widely held misconception that

HM Revenue & Customs is actively clamping down on. There is a small tax

benefit because no interest is deducted at source, meaning returns are

effectively gross from when interest is credited to the account to the point

you pay your tax bill – often over a year later.

Offshore Funds

Tax benefit: Ability to ‘roll-up’ gross dividends/interest (non-distributor

funds only)


Offshore funds are categorised ‘distributor’ and ‘non-distributor’. The former

are taxed as per onshore funds, but the latter benefit from re-invested

dividends and interest not being taxed until they are withdrawn. However

when withdrawals are made both gains and income are subject to income

tax, meaning you cannot use your capital gains tax allowance.

Offshore Insurance Bonds

Tax benefit: No tax on dividends, interest or growth until encashment (or

on annual withdrawals up to 5% of initial investment).


These offer the advantage of returns ‘rolling-up’ gross until encashment.

Up to 5% of the initial investment may also be withdrawn each year with

no tax due at that time. At encashment a calculation known as ‘top-slicing’

is used to calculate the tax liability based on gains and any withdrawals

made. As a higher rate taxpayer, this can work to your benefit if you are

able to become a basic or non-taxpayer in the year of encashment. Unlike

share or unit trust portfolios, investment switches may be made within the

bond without triggering capital gains tax liabilities. Costs, flexibility and

investment choice varies widely, so choose carefully.

Qualifying Policies

Tax benefit: No additional higher rate tax to pay on gains, dividends or

interest


Unloved, except by some financial advisers who earn high commissions

by selling these! You have to maintain a regular saving into these policies

Tax SheltersBy Richard Brown, Bestinvest Consultants Ltd

4 personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007

(often called ‘Maximum Investment Plans’) for a minimum period of

(normally) ten years in order to ‘qualify’. Basic rate tax is deducted from both

gains and income within the policy, but higher rate taxpayers can avoid the

additional higher rate liability.

Offset Mortgages

Tax benefit: The equivalent of tax-free interest on your savings


Suppose you have a £250,000 mortgage and £30,000 of savings in the

bank, both charging/paying a 6% rate of interest. Net of higher rate tax

the savings interest falls to 3.6%. However by combining the two within an

offset account the savings partially offset the mortgage. This reduces your

mortgage payments (in this example by £30,000), meaning the interest saved

is equivalent to 6% tax-free on your savings. You can still withdraw savings

from the mortgage if required.

More Specialist Tax Shelters

These tax shelters are more specialist and potentially risky, but can be

worthwhile for some. Proceed with caution and consider seeking expert

advice of whether they might be suitable for you:

Venture Capital Trusts (VCTs)

Tax benefit: 30% income tax rebate on investment, no tax on gains or

income.

Allowance: £200,000 (Income tax rebate).

Investing in a VCT launch offers a reasonably tempting set of tax breaks.

However, there are risks: VCTs must invest at least 70% of their fund in

unquoted companies (includes AiM) within three years of launch and the VCT

share price can trade at a discount to the underlying net asset value (NAV).

The Chancellor also made changes from April 2006 that reduced the tax

benefits and increased the potential risk profile of these investments.

Enterprise Investment Schemes (EISs)

Tax benefit: Capital gains tax deferral, 20% income tax rebate on investment,

no tax on gains.

Allowance: £200,000 (Income tax rebate).

As with VCTs, the tax relief is intended to encourage investment in small,

unquoted (including AiM) companies. Unlike VCTs, an EIS may only invest

in one company. Understanding the company in which you invest, and the

risks, is vital. These companies may also qualify for ‘Business Property Relief’

meaning the investment could be exempt from Inheritance Tax provided it is

held for at least two years.

Forestry

Tax benefit: 100% Business Property Relief once held for two years, i.e. nil

liability to Inheritance Tax.


This tax break is available to those investing in woodlands that will ultimately

be harvested. It can be used to reduce potential Inheritance Tax liabilities, but

should be viewed as a long term investment.

While this is only a very brief introduction to the world of tax shelters, it should

give you an idea of how you might use them to you advantage. Provided you

satisfy yourself that the underlying investment(s) is appropriate, failing to

use tax shelters is akin to flushing money down the drain!

Author: Richard Brown

Bestinvest Consultants Ltd

020 7189 9993

[email protected]

www.bestinvest.co.uk

Please note that each shelter is subject to rules more complex than outlined

in this article. You should not make any investment decisions using the above

information in isolation. Bestinvest Consultants Ltd is an independent adviser

authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

The articles in this supplement are intended for general information only and should not be construed as advice under the Financial

Services and Markets Act

Are you paying too much for your investment

management?

To see how you can cut the cost of investing and reduce the risk of underperformance, contact Evolve Financial Planning with your email address for our complimentary guide to building modern,

low cost investment portfolios, speci cally designed to help you achieve your nancial aims.

The UK’s First Chartered Financial Planning Firm

Telephone: Antony Williams on 020 7378 0990

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.evolvefp.com

No. 1 Liverpool Street, London, EC2M 7QD

Evolve Financial Planning Ltd is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority

Services for legal professionals

Financial planning, pension and investment management

• Tailored financial strategies • Transparent, • Experienced advisers fee-based charging

Litigation support and Expert Witness

• Personal injury & clinical negligence • Ancillary relief • Contentious trust • Pensions & protection

“Punter Southall gave meinvaluable financial advice missedby my previous adviser. I have been impressed by the quality ofadvice and service I have received.”

Judge (High Court)

For further information, please contact Julia Whittle on 0207 024 7411 or email [email protected]

Punter Southall Financial Management is a trading name of PSFM Limited · PSFM Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority · FSA Registration No.137684 · Registered office: 126 Jermyn Street, London SW1Y 4UJ · Registered in England and Wales No. 2148740

A Punter Southall Group company

Specialist financial solutions

personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 20076

Whilst in relative terms it is still early in the tax year, it is never too early to start thinking about mitigating and reducing the level of contribution you and your family have to make to the Treasury cof-

fers. Not even a change of resident at Number 11 is likely to make us any hap-pier to pay tax of any description. So let us look at several steps that we at Cavanagh believe can be taken to mitigate the tax leakage of assets.

“Tax Delayed is a Tax Saved”Many wealthy individuals maintain relatively large cash balances and for very sound financial planning reasons. However for those who pay higher rates of income tax, this may not be that tax efficient. The following provides an example of a generic savings rate of 6.0% gross together with the results net of tax.

Example:-Bank account pays a rate of 6% gross (3.6% net High Rate Tax Payer) with inflation at 4.4% = losing value!!

It is very much a personal decision as to whether one’s view of the rise in the cost of living is best compared with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the Re-tail Price Index (RPI), but the relative real returns even from an optimistic view point are not that attractive, averaging at around the 1% per annum level.One answer is to hold cash in your partner’s name, but this only works if they are not a higher rate taxpayer. But what if you are not prepared to consider this option, or if they are a higher rate taxpayer? An alternative to consider is the options of tax deferral and to see if this provides for a more attractive position.You could consider holding cash inside a tax shelter of either an onshore or offshore life assurance policy. If this is held in an onshore life policy then the cash returns are deemed to have suffered basic rate income tax (although in actual fact the tax deducted is often less than 20%), whilst an offshore bond suffers no tax deduction on the cash returns.So what is the advantage? In short withdrawals of up to 5% of the original investment can be made each year without incurring an income tax charge, any tax liability being deferred until the investment is encashed or withdraw-als in excess of a cumulative 5% per annum are taken. When that occurs the tax liability is calculated less any tax deemed to have already been paid.This means that effectively an amount broadly equivalent to the interest rate can be withdrawn each year, or deferred and several years of interest taken in one go. The bond can be encashed in a year when suitable circumstances prevail so that a lower rate of tax becomes due. For instance it is relatively easy to become non-resident in the UK for income tax purposes, say for 15 months so that there is no need to pay any tax!Obviously this planning opportunity stands or falls on the attractiveness of the interest rate, net of charges paid on the cash deposits in the life assurance policy – and these will vary from company to company - but they can be very attractive.

Bequest of a “Free” PensionYou could also make a bequest of a “free” pension. Whilst the detail of this opportunity is difficult to explain in this limited space, in essence the idea is to make a gift of approximately £64,000 that will be utilised to generate pen-sion contributions of the £3,600 gross per annum allowed to any individual who is a UK resident, irrespective of their earnings. This can be established so that the initial £64,000 can be either discounted for inheritance tax pur-poses, or treated as a potentially exempt transfer. The income tax treatment of the arrangement can be structured so that the tax relief available on the pension at the very least cancels out the future income tax liabilities on the £64,000. The potential level of benefits will depend upon how old the beneficiary or the arrangement is and when they start drawing their pension. However

using a relatively conservative set of assumptions and assuming that the ar-rangement is left to run for fifty years (i.e. it is taken out for a young child), then the value of the plan outside of the pension would have halved in value, but the pension fund would be approaching £750,000. Both of these figures are based upon inflation-adjusted returns, of 3.5% per annum in the pension and 2.5% per annum outside of the pension after charges.The main advantage of this pension bequest is that it can carry on beyond the death of the donor, unlike arrangements funded out of income.

Children Going to University?With the changes announced in the 2006 Budget to the taxation of trusts, many commentators have concluded that there is little point in utilising an Interest in Possession (IIP) Trust as opposed to a Discretionary or Non IIP Trust.However let us consider the situation of a family who has a child going on to university for - depending upon the course - four or five years. Many parents look to secure a property for their child to live in. The question is how to do this tax efficiently when there is capital gains tax due on the disposal.If the property is purchased via an IIP Trust, then whilst the taxation con-sequences are now the same as Non IIP trusts, the advantage is that if the default beneficiary occupies the trust property, then the trustees will qualify for the Principal Private Residence exemption on the capital gain made.That is not the only potential advantage. Rather than the family providing all the maintenance costs for the child whilst at university, it could be worth considering allowing the child to let out one or two of the rooms in the prop-erty to other students (although it must be appreciated that this can have its own complications). The main advantage of this is that depending upon the levels of income received, it can be covered by the “rent a room” relief which for the current tax year allows rental income of £4,200 per annum to be received tax free.This combination might end up being more tax efficient that the property being owned by parents with an allowance being paid to their child.

Maximum Relievable Pension ContributionsAs far as HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) are concerned there is no monetary limit on contributions that can be made to a pension, income tax relief is however restricted to the greater of 100% of earnings and the Annual Allow-ance (£225,000 for 2007/08). And remember those without any UK earnings can still make a contribution of £3,600 per annum gross.However there is a disparity between the income year running to 5 April an-nually and the Annual Allowance, which is based upon Input Periods. Input Periods are set by the pension scheme but can be altered by the individual, so long as they do not run for more than 365 days and you do not have more than one Input Period ending in any income tax year.This means that in a relatively short period, (as little as a few weeks, so long as they straddle two tax years) it is possible to make tax relievable pension contributions of up to £705,000 gross. This is based upon using the Annual Allowance of £225,000 for 2007/08, £235,000 for 2008/09, and £245,000 for 2009/10. Of course this does require the individual to have earnings in the first two tax years of at least £705,000. Given that a pension scheme can borrow capital of up 50% of scheme assets, this would allow a property of up to £1m to be easily purchased by a pension scheme utilising a very short funding period. Possibly useful for a prospective chambers purchase!!

ConclusionCavanagh Group is a firm of Independent Financial Advisers with offices na-tionwide. The above is just a very brief outline from the Cavanagh Group of some of the ways that it can be possible to mitigate or reduce the level of tax contribution that an individual or family might have to make. Neill Millard – Group Director (0845 601 3190)

Taxing Times Ahead?By Neill Millard – Group Director – Cavanagh Group


"It is rare to find an adviser that is truly independent andwho can offer advice without having something to sell.Saunderson House has saved me a great deal of time andmoney by thoroughly reviewing my portfolio, rebalancingin a timely and focused manner, and cutting outunnecessary costs. They are most certainly value formoney and I would highly recommend them."

Successful Entrepreneur

Saunderson House Limited

Independent Financial Advisers, 1 Long Lane, London , EC1A 9HF

Tel:020 7315 6500

Fax:020 7315 6550

web:www.saunderson-house.co.uk

Authorised and Regulated by the Financial Services Authority

CAN YOU SAYTHIS ABOUT

YOUR FINANCIALADVISER?

FOCUSED

FINANCIAL

ADVICE

If not, then do please contact Nick Fletcher on 020 7315 6504 (direct)

for a confidential discussion. We provide hourly-rate independent financial advice

to more than 1,000 clients, many of whom are lawyers or accountants in London

firms, successful entrepreneurs and family estates.


The ability to share a pension on divorce enables the division of what is often a significantly large asset. This allows for a greater degree of flexibility when dividing the matrimonial assets creating a variation on

the offsetting approach of ‘I’ll keep my pension, you have the house’.

The concept of pension sharing is extremely simple but in practice poses some difficulties. This article considers some of the most common hurdles and outlines a practical approach to resolving these issues.

Value

The first step is to value the pension, and legislation prescribes the method for calculating the value of retirement benefits by the provider using the cash equivalent transfer value (CETV). This method was chosen for pension sharing primarily because it is an approach that already exists for the calculation of benefits for people leaving their pension scheme early. It is therefore an accepted way to get important information from the providers of pension arrangements whether for a final salary pension or a money purchase pension.

In the early days of pension sharing the value of the pension, as represented by the CETV, was simply another factor which the court had to take into account. The pension, if shared, was usually divided based on the capital value irrespective of the potential income that could be produced. However, it is now widely appreciated that pensions are not simply a capital sum, and that a 50-50 pension share does not provide parity of income.

In the case of Martin-Dye v Martin-Dye where pensions in payment were involved, the Court of Appeal found that the pensions were no more than non-transferable income streams and that their value should not be treated as equivalent in quality to the other matrimonial property. Further, it was held that a result which left one party with pensions in payment as their major share of the matrimonial property was not fair. Pension sharing, rather than offsetting, became the preferred approach.

However, bear in mind that the outcome of pension sharing can differ for pre-payment plans depending on whether the pension is a defined benefit or a defined contribution scheme.

Money purchase

If both parties have money purchase benefits, the CETV method is usually the correct way to arrive at a fair valuation of retirement benefits. However for a final salary pension the assumption that the scheme member terminates membership is usually incorrect and therefore does not represent a fair value of benefits.

Although money purchase schemes (personal pension, retirement annuity contracts, stakeholder pensions) are relatively straightforward to share, there are certain issues to consider. Probably most important is whether the contract provides guaranteed annuity rates. There is no value to the recipient in selecting one money purchase pension over another as the pension share (pension credit) is converted to cash by way of a cheque which is sent to the new pension arrangement.

I have been involved in cases where the wife has requested a particular

pension. This request is only relevant to those defined benefit schemes where the spouse can become a member and gain rights in excess of those that could have been purchased with her portion of the CETV on the open market. For money purchase schemes there is little potential for schadenfreude here.

However, there are money purchase plans with guaranteed benefits, and plans with large penalties on transfer which are reflected in the CETV. Both parties should avoid sharing these plans if possible as it will reduce the overall level of income for both parties.

This issue of sharing pensions that contain a penalty on transfer is interesting when looking at the overall pension income that can be generated from a pension post share.

Defined benefit

If sharing a defined benefit scheme, the total level of income is likely to be less post-share. The CETV will make assumptions of the value of these benefits in today's terms as well as assuming the member will leave service at the time of divorce. However, this is rarely the case, so an incorrect and undervalued projection for the retirement benefits is produced.

An additional issue is that women typically live longer and are usually younger than their husbands. Even in exceptional cases where the ex-spouse is offered membership of the member’s scheme which can provide superior benefits than could be purchased on the open market, the overall benefits will probably be lower to the divorcee simply because of the gender issue.

Benefits purchased on the open market are costed according to the sex and age of the individual. Parity of income calculations can throw up pension sharing percentages of up to 70% in favour of the wife to address this issue. Not surprisingly, husbands, find this difficult to accept.

The solution seems simple - if you want to keep hold of your pension, older women look far more attractive!

Pension simplification - introduced on 6 April 2006, and known as A Day - has provided some interesting scenarios for divorce. The main impact upon pension sharing is the introduction of the Lifetime Allowance (LTA), which currently stands at £1.6million and the enhanced contribution limits. Any benefits taken in excess of the LTA will suffer a tax charge of 55% if taken as cash. Up until 5th April 2009, it is possible to protect pension rights from this tax charge although in practice this route means the end to further contributions. So only those members with significantly large pension funds, essentially those at or near the LTA, should register for protection.

Pension credits received before A Day will not count towards the LTA of the recipient, provided the right to an additional LTA is registered with HMRC by 5th April 2009.

However, the value of any pension credits received post A Day will count towards the LTA of the recipient unless the pension that is being shared has come into payment since A Day. In this case, the ex-spouse can register the pension credit for an additional LTA as the pension credit would have already counted towards the member’s LTA where members have elected for protection. This means that in some circumstances, it is sensible to suggest

Why husbands should be toy boys

By Daniela Glover, director at Smith & Williamson, the accountancy, investment management and

financial services group

personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007 9

Email [email protected] or [email protected] or call 020 7304 2000Citroen Wells, Devonshire House, 1 Devonshire Street London W1W 5DRRegistered to carry on audit work and regulated for a range of investment business activities by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales

Citroen Wells - first class service at affordable pricesExpert accounting services for chambers and barristers

At Citroen Wells we’re all about taking the pressure off… we believe in

providing an unrivalled level of service. So whether you’re a barrister or

chambers - we’re here to help. Whatever the financial issue, Citroen Wells

have the expertise in:

• Tax, PAYE and VAT investigations

• Accounts and tax return preparation

• Bookkeeping, VAT return and payroll services

• Constructive tax and financial planning

• Accountants reports for commercial litigation,

investigations, asset tracing and insolvency

citroen wellsCHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS

to the parties that the pension should be vested before a pension share is put in place.

If the pension has either not come into force or did so before A Day, the maximum tax efficient share will be limited to the LTA unless the recipient had a pension plan in force at A Day that could accept the pension credit. If the recipient elects for enhanced protection on the existing pension, the pension credit transfer will not break the protection and so a pension credit in excess of the LTA can be protected.

Tax efficiency

It was not possible before A Day to rebuild lost pension rights. However, the new legislation is such that pension rights can now be rebuilt up to the Lifetime Allowance. One could therefore argue that sharing a pension is a very tax efficient means of balancing the share of assets in divorce if one is a higher rate tax payer as any rebuilding would only cost 60p in the pound.

The new contribution limits allow high earners to rebuild at a much greater pace making this option a viable solution.

Summary

In divorce cases where there are complex pension arrangements it is becoming more common to appoint a pensions expert to provide expert evidence to the court. The outcome may result in offsetting, earmarking or pension sharing. This can add to the overall costs of a case and so the court must be satisfied that the extra costs associated with expert evidence are justified. An independent financial adviser with the appropriate pension

sharing experience is often more relevant than an actuary when dealing with A Day issues as most actuaries are not authorised or inclined to provide pension advice. Courts often automatically request an actuarial report when we believe they really mean pension expert.

Daniela Glover, director, Smith & Williamson the accountancy and investment management and financial services group. Tel 020 7131 4440

Press Office:Kate Harrison or Sarah Miller 020 7131 4228 / 4264

DisclaimerBy necessity, this briefing can only provide a short overview and it is essential to seek professional advice before applying the contents of this article. No responsibility can be taken for any loss arising from action taken or refrained from on the basis of this publication. Details correct at time of writing.

Note to editorsSmith & Williamson is an independent professional and financial services group employing over 1,300 people. The group is a leading provider of investment management, financial advisory and accountancy services to private clients, professional practices and mid-to-large corporates. The group operates from offices in London, Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow, Guildford, Maidstone, Salisbury, Southampton and Worcester.

Smith & Williamson Financial Services LimitedAuthorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.


Legislative changes to the pensions landscape which took place on 6th April 2006, known as A-Day, opened the way for a new breed of aggressive pension savers. All UK residents, employed and self employed, can now

get tax relief on contributions of up to 100% of their earnings – salary and other earned income – each year subject to an upper annual allowance and an overall lifetime allowance. The annual contribution allowance for the tax year 2007/08 is a huge £225,000 while the overall lifetime limit for the client’s pension pot is £1.6m1.

For some clients, particularly those in professions with larger salaries and annual bonus entitlements, the concept of long-term regular premium pension saving may become a thing of the past as they will now be able to aggressively fund for their retirement with high annual or single contributions over the shorter term. If these clients are also looking for a greater degree of control over their pension savings and alternative investment exposure for their pension portfolio a Self Invested Personal Pension (SIPP) may be their new product of choice.

Additionally new concurrency rules brought in at A-Day mean that clients can put money into a SIPP even if they are already contributing to another pension, such as a defined benefit or defined contribution company pension scheme2.

SIPPs started life very much as a niche product but due to a strong reputation and continued popularity among advisers and clients they have now become very much part of the mainstream individual pensions market. As such SIPPs are brought to market by a wide range of financial services companies including specialist pension administrators and trustees, banks and building societies, insurance companies, fund supermarkets, investment managers, stockbrokers and even by financial advisers themselves. For this reason it is important to search the market for a SIPP provider and product which can meet and service the client’s individual needs.

SIPPs have an unbundled structure where the standard charges – set up, annual administration and investment transaction fees – are designed to cover administrative and processing costs. The charges are normally subject to VAT, vary greatly between SIPP companies and the client may be expected to pay:

• Establishment or set up fee – initial charges for setting up the SIPP can range from nil to over £750 but the market average is around £250.• Annual administration fee – recurring administration charges for the SIPP range from nil to over £1,000 but the market average is around £300.• Investment transaction fee – depending on the complexity of processing the investment transaction fees range from nil to £50 but the market average is around £15.

The most common method of collecting the annual administration fee is annually in advance but obviously where a set up fee is also levied this can have an impact on the year one costs for the client. Additional charges may be levied for such duties as valuation of the portfolio, property purchase, processing of contributions and for the administration of transfers into or out of the SIPP. The client should ensure that they are provided with a clear listing of administrative and investment processing duties along with the associated costs by SIPP companies in order that they can carry out cost comparisons.

The jewel in the crown where SIPPs are concerned, and the main differentiator between SIPPs and other retirement saving products, is their investment flexibility as investors may be able to include the following within their SIPP investment portfolio:

• Cash deposits• Unit trusts and Open Ended Investment Companies (OEICs)• Investment trusts• Insurance funds• UK stocks and shares• Overseas stocks and shares quoted on a recognised Stock Exchange• Government securities and other fixed interest stocks• Commercial land and property • Traded endowment policies• Futures and Options• Unquoted shares

These are among the investments permitted by the Inland Revenue but it does not mean that they are all automatically catered for within all SIPP products. Once the client’s portfolio asset mix has been agreed on they will need to find the SIPP product which can accommodate the associated investments.

Due to the sheer number of investment options and associated complexities it is important for the client to seek financial and/or investment advice when structuring their approach to retirement saving through a SIPP.For those clients who wish to have their mix of investment assets professionally managed it is possible to arrange for a discretionary investment manager to be appointed to run the SIPP portfolio.

If the client has an existing business relationship with such an investment manager they will need to search for a SIPP proposition which is flexible enough to facilitate this appointment. A charge may be levied by the provider for making the investment manager appointment to the SIPP. If the client has no prior experience of a discretionary investment manager, but wishes to make use of such services, they will need to search for a SIPP which offers defined links to such a manager or panel of managers.

Assets which are regularly traded within SIPPs are collective investments, which include unit trusts, OEICs and investment trusts, and equities. Due to this demand, and the involvement of fund supermarkets and stockbrokers in the market, it is becoming easier and more cost effective to access investment support and trading services such as fund and share trading platforms via SIPP products. Trading in these asset types via these mechanisms has also improved the availability of online valuations of the SIPP portfolio. This has resulted in lower cost propositions, including online SIPPs, which focus on these asset types rather than servicing all permitted investments entering the market.

Within the wide range of permitted SIPP investments one of the main attractions is the ability for the client to invest directly in commercial property such as offices, industrial units, hotels, care homes, shops or student accommodation. Identifying a provider who is comfortable with administering commercial property purchases and ongoing property management is a pre-requisite for the client and specialist SIPP companies tend to focus on dealing with this complex asset type. High costs may be involved when utilising direct property investment and it should be remembered that property is an illiquid asset.

Unleash the SIPPSIPPs started life very much as a niche product but due to a strong reputation and continued

popularity among advisers and clients they have now become very much part of the mainstream

individual pensions market

By Matt Ward, head of pensions and wealth management, Defaqto Group


• Individual and group pension advice

• Tax efficient savings and investments

• Pension valuation and retirement forecast

• Experienced SIPP team for purchase of chambers

• Group protection discounts for barrister’s chambers

• Specialist barrister accountancy connection

• Aged Debt Funding

Specialists inproviding financialadvice to the Bar

Cavanagh Group is a trading name of Cavanagh Financial Management Limited

which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

The FSA does not regulate taxation and trust advice.

Registered in Scotland Number SC096918.

Registered office: George House, 36 North Hanover Street, Glasgow, G1 2AD.

Cavanagh Financial Management is a subsidiary of Cavanagh Group PLC

For further information call 0845 601 3190or email us at: [email protected]

Enter Cavanagh’s prize draw for the chance to win a pair of return tickets fromLondon to New York on the new luxury business class carrier Silverjet.

To enter go to the Solicitors & Barristers page at www.cavanagh.co.ukor come and see us at the Bar Conference.

Bar Conference 2007

The Cavanagh Group...Where quality underpins business

Cav A4 AD 07.qxd 14/8/07 1:22 pm Page 1


In order to fund the property purchase a SIPP can borrow on commercial terms up to 50% of the fund’s net value. For example a client with a fund of £150,000 could borrow a further £75,000 which would enable a property purchase for around £225,000. The rent accrued from the property may be used to cover the mortgage repayments or, where there is no mortgage involved, the rent will remain in the client’s SIPP and can be used for other investments.

It is also possible for members of the same SIPP arrangement to pool their pension funds together, and hence enhance their buying potential, for the purchase of a commercial property. A further benefit of holding a commercial property, as with all permitted investments, in this manner is that no capital gains tax will be payable on any gains made within the SIPP.

As with other individual pension products the client can take up to 25% of their SIPP fund as a tax-free lump sum, plus an income from the fund, between the ages of 503 and 75. If the client wishes to remain exposed to investment markets at retirement and take an income from the SIPP fund, rather than purchase a lifetime annuity, they can elect to do so in the form of unsecured pension4. The ability to do this via a SIPP provides a further example of how the client can exert greater control over how and when they take income from their fund.

For the reasons and benefits described above clients experiencing poorly performing funds, low service standards or high charges with their existing pension arrangements are among those who may wish to consider a move to SIPP. Similarly those clients with disparate pension arrangements from previous employments may also wish to consider consolidating all of their retirement savings in one place, within a SIPP, and benefit from easier administration, a more organised investment portfolio and more cost effective charges.

Clients should ensure that in re-arranging their pension arrangements they are not giving up any entitlement to enhanced benefits from their existing products or experiencing high transfer penalties. Additionally if their existing pension arrangements contain benefits which have built up as a result of contracting-out of State pension schemes, commonly known as protected rights benefits, they will need to find a provider who can accommodate these funds.

It is also important for clients to take other individual pension solutions into account when making their product choice and to make comparisons between the features on offer and the associated charges. The two main alternative product types are individual stakeholder and personal pension plans and the clients needs may well be catered for within these product categories as well.

1These limits will be increased in future tax years2Contributions to all pensions are again subject to the maximum annual and lifetime allowances3The minimum age at which the client can take retirement benefits increases to 55 from 20104This method of taking retirement income is also known as income drawdown

Matt Ward – Head of pensions and wealth management Defaqto Groupwww.defaqto.com; www.find.co.uk; www.sippsupermarket.co.uk


It is forty years since the publication of the Money Game by ‘Adam Smith’. Not the Scottish economist on the back of the new £20 note, but a US fund manager turned journalist called George Goodman who wrote a classic

about how financial markets really work. I make a point of reading it at some stage during each market cycle, usually at times of crisis. Now seems as good a time as any to see whether what moved markets in 1967 remains pertinent in 2007.

One chapter is entitled ‘Mr Smith admits his biases’. Trying to make sense of what has gone on in recent months, and make some judgement on how to proceed requires not only a careful assessment of the facts but also a judgement about the psychological state or biases of investors and central bankers.

Successful long term investment is about managing risk, diversification and taking advantage of opportunities as they occur. Astute risk management is as much about knowing when to take increased risk as well as knowing how to reduce it. Diversification has to be genuine rather than cosmetic and even long term investors have to be prepared to make quick decisions during volatile market conditions.

The removal of trade and financial barriers over the last quarter of a century has made markets far more correlated than in the past. However, one of the interesting issues that has emerged is that investor attitudes vary from country to country and so does the approach of central bankers. In the current environment both groups have a very important role in re-establishing stability. In the UK investors are committed to international equity investment, because of the limitations of the UK economy. Furthermore, although inflation has been low for many years, we remain scarred by our inflationary experience in the 1970’s. Property and equities prove to be a better store of value during this difficult time than bonds. In contrast, continental European investors are more interested in liquidity and security. Their inflation experience has been better over the last 30 years, hence their rather different bias. Moving further a field, Latin American investors have an entirely different bias. All have very clear memories of currency devaluation, high inflation and government default. The concept of cash on deposit at the bank and sovereign debt as risk free is rather alien and as a result, absolute return strategies such as hedge funds were adopted as a core part of investment portfolios much earlier than in Europe.

Central banks have their own set of biases and again these differ by region. In Europe, controlling inflation remains the top priority not only in Germany but in other countries with less satisfactory records of financial control. In contrast the Federal Reserve believes that a monetary policy mistake caused the 1930’s depression and has no wish to repeat the mistakes of the past. Looking back to 2000-2003, it is no surprise that it was the Federal Reserve that was prepared to cut interest rates to 1% in order to sustain economic growth rather than the ECB.

The credit crunch that started in February and is yet to fully unwind has been endlessly reported during the summer months. As ever, the initial shocks were already largely discounted and it was only in late June that investors started to pay attention as it became clear that two credit derivative hedge funds run by Bear Stearns had lost a lot of money in a very short period of time. This hit to confidence spread throughout markets and investors took action to reduce risk. Financial assets of all descriptions fell in value and in some areas, instruments such as Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDOs), liquidity dried up altogether. Previously uncorrelated assets, which might have been thought to offer diversification benefits suddenly correlated and even gold fell in price. Only government bonds, cash on deposit at reputable banks and funds able to take short position either in credit or equity markets provided protection.

There are a number of measures of risk but perhaps the best known is the Chicago Board of Options Exchange Volatility Index usually referred to as the VIX, which is a weighted average of option implied volatility.

The first conclusion to draw is that risk is now more appropriately priced. Therefore, investors looking forward 12-18 months need to be looking for opportunities to put money back into risk assets on a diversified basis. There are many more opportunities now than just a few weeks ago.

Earlier this year, central banks including the all powerful Fed were thought to be passengers rather than drivers of growth of financial markets. Now what Fed officials choose to say and do has become extremely important. The provision of liquidity by central banks in recent weeks has ensured that financial markets have continued to operate in an effective manner, but we are now at a critical stage in the economic cycle. The key decision will be whether to stimulate economic growth which is showing signs of slowing by cutting interest rates or to make entirely certain that inflation, which tends to be a lagging indicator, is well and truly under control. The latter being the stated aim of the FED.

The most likely outcome is that, if the set back in financial markets and the withdrawal of liquidity adversely affects economic growth and consumer confidence, then the Fed will be prepared to cut rates even if there is criticism that once again they are bailing out the speculators. Those of us involved in

Opportunities in Financial Markets – admit to your biases

By David Miller, Head of Alternative Investments Cheviot Asset Management


financial markets will be watching this debate with particular interest over the next few months.

The setback in equity markets over the last month presents investment opportunities. It is interesting to note that during August, buying by company directors picked up sharply. In addition, newly announced share buybacks by companies reached the highest level since 2001/2002. Both groups are taking a positive view on the prospect of equities over the next year. At the same time, new issues have been withdrawn and so overall the supply of equities is being steadily reduced. Another driver of equities earlier in the year was merger and acquisition activity. There tends to be a lull in the summer but, even if private equity deals subside, cash rich companies looking to improve margins and gain market share are likely to do further deals during the latter part of the year. Stock selection is always important but particularly so at the moment. Well managed companies generating cash and with sound balance sheets are attractive at current levels, but it is probably best to avoid those sectors most highly correlated to financial markets such as banks and property.

For committed contrarians the Japanese equity market is worth a look. Despite being on a reasonable rating when compared to other leading markets, Japan has yet again fallen further and faster than the rest. Corporate Japan is now making sensible decisions about how to earn a decent return on capital and because of the problems of the past, financial leverage is low. Dividend and share buybacks are at a level that is starting to attract investors interested in income. The Yen has also strengthened as markets have fallen and the carry trade has unwound, and this is an added bonus for international investors.

In summary, markets have received a significant and shock over the last few months further problems are likely to emerge. Credit fuelled growth is over for this cycle, but on a selective basis investors should be looking for opportunities to invest in equities in order to take advantage of attractive valuations and in anticipation of central bank intervention to sustain economic growth which will initially take the form of lower interest rates.

Clarity from Complexity

MERLIN FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS is anIndependent Financial Consultancy based in HighHolborn. Formed in 1988 the company hasdeveloped because it is trusted by its clients. A trustbased upon an experienced, open and honestapproach.

One’s personal objectives can fall under manyheadings, to be achieved they will all require someplanning and more often than not some means offinance. Merlin Financial Consultants’ services aredesigned to aid the setting of financial objectives,support the monitoring of existing targets and liaisewith you over the reappraisal of your objectives. Inparticular to address those longer-termrequirements that it is so easy to procrastinate over,which then become a prime cause for serious worry.

WORKING FOR YOU

Our purpose is to provide you with qualityinformation to enable you, with our assistance, tocreate viable financial plans for the future

Merlin Financial Consultants has no links to anyfinancial group or institution. Our commitment is toyou and nobody else. This enables our advice to becompletely unbiased. We are happy to work on apure fee basis, or if preferable on a disclosedcommission basis or combination. Please call us foran initial review to ascertain if we can draw clarityfrom the complexity of your personal affairs.

Northumberland House, 303/306 High Holborn, London WC1V 7JZTel: 020 7404 4711 • Fax: 020 7405 1904 • email: [email protected]


Stock Market Jitters

The recent falls in the stock markets around the world have reminded investors that equities are not a “one-way bet”. As the risk warnings state, their value may “fall as well as rise”. Whilst many investors will

be happy to take a longer term approach to equity investment and therefore will not be unduly concerned about short-term falls in share prices, there are other investors who literally cannot sleep at night. So what is the solution for such investors?

Cash Deposits

As cash deposits are at present providing attractive rates of interest, many investors are naturally and sensibly allocating a high level of funds to cash accounts. We have indeed been able to obtain returns close to 7% gross per annum on certain cash-based investments for many of our clients and such a return without investment risk is very attractive.

However, interest rates will not necessarily remain at such high levels in the future and historically other asset classes have provided higher returns than cash over the medium to long-term. Equities have been one such asset, although as we have seen some investors are concerned about the volatility of returns.

An Alternative Solution?

One solution for such investors is to seek access to equities through structured or guaranteed investments.

The marketing gurus within the investment world are constantly coming up with new ideas to attract the money of potential investors. This is especially prevalent in the world of structured and guaranteed investments but it is important to fully understand the terms of each structured product if one is to asses whether it is appropriate for an investor’s specific aims and circumstances.

Structured products are fixed term investments used to provide clients with exposure to equity markets, and other asset classes, but with protection built into the original capital should the value of the underlying asset class fall over the term of the investment. As such they can be considered as a lower risk method of gaining exposure to equity and other investment markets; the only risk to capital (beyond the level of protection, and if held to maturity) will usually be the financial security of the institution issuing the investment.

The protection can work in a number of ways with either (a) the original capital being protected in full, (b) with a reduced amount of the capital, say 90%, being protected in full, or (c) where the original capital is protected in full unless the underlying market falls by a certain amount (such as 50%) at which point the investment will become a tracker with full market downside exposure.

Is now the Time to Buy?

We believe that now is an attractive time for clients to consider such structured products for a number of reasons. First, to provide the capital protection, the institution structuring the product normally sets aside a certain amount of cash which will grow after say five years to provide the full capital protection. For example, the institution will set aside £75 for every £100 invested in the knowledge that that £75 should grow to £100 after five years to provide the capital protection. The other £25 is available to purchase options on the stock market and obviously to cover relevant charges. As interest rates have increased recently, fewer funds are required to provide the capital protection and therefore more funds are available to purchase the options.

Second, although the recent stock market falls have increased short-term volatility, over the last few years volatility has generally reduced within the stock market, and this has enabled better terms to be achieved on these products. It is common for example to be able to obtain much higher exposure than 100% on the growth of a stock market over five years with full capital protection. For example, we recently were able to access a fund linked to a European stock market which provided investors with 160% of any rise in the D J Eurostoxx 50 Index over five years with a capital guarantee of the initial £1 at the end of five years.

Liquidity

Historically, clients have often steered clear of such products because of the requirement to remain invested in individual products for a period of say five years. Structured products bought on the retail market are often highly illiquid and need to be held for their full term. However, we can now access such structured products through institutions which provide daily liquidity in these products. Therefore, if funds do need to be raised at short notice, it can be arranged.

We work with one particular institution which only invests in structured products which offer daily liquidity. This enables them to switch out of particular products into more attractively priced issues when appropriate. They also can purchase existing products within their term and therefore may only need to hold them for less than three years until maturity rather than the usual five years.

Timeframe

The timescale available for investment will impact on the potential investment opportunities. For example, if a shorter timeframe is required, an existing structured product due to mature in a year’s time could be purchased but this is unlikely to have full capital protection as the protection will only apply at the original launch price. The availability though of such “second-hand” structured products can increase the opportunities available to investors.

Structured Products - Have Your Cake and Eat It

By Adam Katten, Director – Chiltern Financial Management

16 personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007

Investment Security

When assessing different structured products, it is important to consider who is providing the capital protection under a particular product. Therefore, we would normally only advise clients to invest in products backed by AA-rated institutions or a spread of A-rated institutions so their capital is protected.

Product Features

Structured products can be linked to many different assets and indices but most commonly are linked to major stock market indices such as the FTSE 100 Index or the DJ Eurostoxx 50 Index.

Returns will be affected by whether the final index value is taken at a specific date or averaged over the last six months or a year. Whilst averaging can help protect the investment from stock market crashes at the end of the investment term, it will often reduce the return from the investment assuming markets generally rise. However, it is common for the final return to be the average of the relevant index over the last six months.

There will sometimes be a maximum return offered on a particular product where no additional growth will be given above that return. For example, a product may offer a geared return on a particular index up to a maximum level. Recently one such product was launched which offered a return of 10 times the Eurostoxx 50 Index subject to a cap of 60% over a six year period, i.e. if the index rose by only 6%, a 60% return would be achieved.

A further feature offered in some products is a “knock-out” feature where a specific return will be given after a period of time if a particular condition is met. For example, one recent product offered a return of £1.13 for every £1 invested as long as the DJ Eurostoxx Index was at or above its starting level at the end of the first year. If this was not the case, it would carry on into year two where it would pay out £1.26 as long as this condition was met. The “knock-out” feature would continue to accumulate until such time as the index was at or above its starting point, provided the index did not fall by more than 40% at which point the investment would become an index tracker.

Tax Treatment

Structured products can be liable to income tax or capital gains tax. We tend to favour those products which are liable to capital gains tax as this enables investors to utilise taper relief to reduce the level of tax payable as well as their annual capital gains tax allowances to mitigate this tax.

Conclusion

You can see from this article that there are many different structured products available and therefore specialist advice is needed to obtain the most suitable products for individual investors. However, we certainly believe that they have a part to play in the portfolios of many clients.

With the recent falls in stock markets around the world, many investors are concerned about retaining or increasing exposure to equities. However, they still want to benefit from any potential rises in such markets as have occurred

over the last few years.

Structured products can be the ideal solution for those investors as long as the underlying guarantee is provided by a financially sound institution and clients are happy with the specific terms of the products being offered.

We firmly believe that these types of investments can be ideally suited to many private clients looking to diversify and pass wealth down the generations. You can indeed both have your cake and eat it with these products!

Adam Katten is head of Chiltern financial management, the financial planning arm of Chiltern plc, the leading independent tax adviser. With 15 years experience advising high net worth clients on their financial arrangements, Adam specialises in investment advice and pension planning.

Please remember that past performance should not be seen as an indication of future performance. The value of shares and units and the income from them may go down as well as up, and investors may not get back the amount they originally invested. Changes in rates of exchange may also cause the value of investments to go up or down. Tax information is based upon current information and this may change in the future. Not all the products and services mentioned above are regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

Chiltern Financial Management is a trading name of NLP Financial Management Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

D: 020 7153 2417E: [email protected]

Tel: 01242 254149 Email: [email protected] Financial Planning Ltd is authorised and regulated by The Financial Services Authority

Are you in the position of holding a number of plans, with a

variety of insurance companies with no clear idea of what they

are worth or whether they will provide sufficient funds for you

to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle in retirement?

Why not take control of your destiny, and call us for a pensions review to see if your plans are on track.Please call Diane Weitz on 01242 254149

www.ashlea-fp.co.uk

Have you lost confidence in pensions?

Individual solutions designed to put you in control

* Income protection

* Investment

* Retirement

Our aim is to bring clarity to our clients’ fi nancial planning arrangements enabling your most important decisions to be made with confi dence. We tailor our research, analysis and advice to meet today’s priorities and provide full fi nancial management and portfolio services to ensure effective support and structure for the future.

Ash-RidgeAsset Management

Independent Financial Advisers

Temple Chambers

3-7 Temple Avenue

London EC4Y OHP

Tel: 020 7353 8001Fax: 020 7353 8007

email: [email protected]

www.ash-ridge.com

Judge us for yourself

ISN’T LIFE COMPLICATED ENOUGH?


Just looking at this title you can see the issue for financial advisers and potential customers in black and white. Do investment customers want to be sold to, do they want advice, or do they want both? But how does

the adviser get rewarded for giving excellent advice? And how do we stop the adviser from giving potentially poor advice in order to make a sale?In simple terms, how does the financial services industry reward the provision of good advice and dissuade those from providing bad advice? Can it really be as difficult as we seem to make it?Arguably, the financial services market uses a number of different carrots and sticks for this purpose. Unfortunately, they are used for other purposes too and so nearly all have drawbacks that require counter balances.

Initial Commission:Commissions payable by the product provider certainly create an incentive for advisers to encourage people to save or protect their loved ones from unforeseen events. They are also a popular option with consumers – generally Joe Public prefers a carrot that they don’t have to write a cheque for. But does commission encourage good advice? It certainly can. An adviser incentivised to persuade someone to take action to solve a future financial issue can be more effective than one who is merely paid to give strong advice. But we also know the problem with up front commission is that it can be an influencing factor when an adviser chooses between products and providers. Fine if the consumer is not disadvantaged, but who is deciding whether that is the case? More often than not, it’s the adviser. Hmm.Ok, but if we put in place lots of compliance rules and have counter balances and procedures, surely we can mitigate such instances and protect our customers? Of course we can – and many do.But it would be much easier and more efficient if we didn’t need to.

Up Front Fees:Obvious solution. Let’s do away with commission and get the customers to pay the adviser for the advice. They can pay a one off fixed fee or by the hour, and our adviser will be on call 24/7 to give them high quality professional advice, just like an accountant, solicitor or indeed barrister. Excellent. Now, we know that the advice won’t be biased so it should improve in quality. Except, it is biased. Biased towards those who can afford, and often more importantly are willing, to pay the fee every time advice is needed. It’s also geared towards those who call upon their adviser in the same way they do their accountant or solicitor – they’ve identified a need and want help with the solution. For the rest of us, who don’t have an accountant and don’t know what we don’t know, do we call in our adviser annually just to check that we don’t need him? Who’s going to persuade us to take action with our finances? And there’s nothing in this arrangement that specifically encourages good advice, just advice. Hmm.

So we need a way of charging consumers over a period of time that can work alongside up front fees, perhaps spreading the cost of advice for some consumers. It needs to be straightforward, transparent, easy to administer and flexible. Better still, it should reward the adviser for getting things right and dissuade the adviser from making poor choices. Oh, and it shouldn’t create bias.

Trail Commission or Recurring Fees:That would be some form of ongoing performance related fee then. Trail commission based on a percentage of the fund value at regular intervals?To have no bias, it should be paid on the same basis regardless of the fund

or product chosen and to really work as an incentive to continue providing excellent advice, it should be able to be turned off by the consumer or switched to another adviser.Incentivising good advice? Well, trail commissions that can be stopped certainly encourage advice that is regularly reviewed and it can also encourage advisers to recommend solid underlying investment performance, that way the regular commission increases over time as the investment does. Does it dissuade advisers from giving poor advice? Not really, but at least it doesn’t have a negative influence.So why aren’t advisers all offering their services on an initial fee and trail commission basis? Simple answer. Affordability. If an adviser has been used to high up front commissions and believes the right counter balances are in place, why reduce income for the next three to five years by adopting a less attractive financial model in the short term?I guess that depends on how an adviser views the next few years. The Financial Services Authority has recently published its Retail Distribution Review, already referred to as the RDR in an industry that loves its abbreviations. This review has sought the views of industry participants in order to solve what the FSA perceives to be a systemic failure of the advice market, particularly in relation to commission bias and product ‘churning’, but also in relation to opening up consumer access to advice.The Financial Services Authority has taken on board industry suggestions that what is needed is an adviser fee based system that encompasses the benefits of commission as a simple and cost effective payment mechanism without its potential drawbacks. The industry knew it as ‘Factory Gate’ pricing and the FSA have settled on referring to it as ‘Customer Agreed Remuneration’.Effectively, under the proposals, advisers have an option to agree a ‘fee’ with the client for their advice before any product recommendation is made, select from a range of products that are commission free (hence the term ‘factory gate’ pricing – with no loading for the advice costs) and then deduct any agreed advice fee from the investment product. Advisers can still offer a ‘free’ financial review and can still cross-subsidise those clients who don’t take up their recommendations by those that do if they so wish. The key difference, however, is that their recommendation cannot be influenced by the commission payment as this is agreed up front and is the same regardless of the provider chosen.Typically, such arrangements work on a percentage basis – i.e. the adviser will take 4% of any investment recommended and taken up for the initial advice, plus 0.5% of the investment value per annum for constantly reviewing the investment thereafter – but it can also work on a fixed amount basis. Because the amount is independent of the provider or product selected and appears as an explicit charge on any investment made, clients are, not surprisingly, much more willing to enter into negotiation, particularly if they have a large portfolio.Bias and conflicts of interest are virtually eliminated from the advice charge – of course they may still exist elsewhere – and advisers are actively encouraged to constantly review a portfolio to continue to justify their ongoing advice charge.It isn’t as black and white as this article portrays, but the white side is gaining momentum. Government – DWP and Treasury, the FSA, product providers, adviser firms, consumers and increasingly the Press are influencing the way adviser businesses will operate in the future. This means more choice for customers with more control over how they pay for advice and surely this can only be a good thing – at last we are beginning to acknowledge one size doesn’t fit all.

Commission/Fees

In simple terms, how does the financial services industry reward the provision of good advice and

dissuade those from providing bad advice? Can it really be as difficult as we seem to make it?

By Peter Jolly – Strategic Development Manager – Standard Life


Making your money work for yo u

Ti l n ey is one of the UK’s largest and longest established wealth management firms, with a reputation for

q u a l i t y, client service and investment performance.

Part of the Deutsche Bank Group Multi asset class, tailored investment strategy

Client assets in excess of £8 billion Direct access to Investment Managers

O ver 15,000 clients B e s p o ke client service

Pension/SIPP Portfolios, Offshore Bond Six offices in London, Birmingham,

and IHT Po r t f o l i o s Edinburgh, Glasgow, Liverpool,

and Shrew s b u r y

Ti l n ey Investment Management is a member of the London Stock Exc h a n g e

and is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Au t h o r i t y.

FSA Register Number 124255. Ti l n ey Investment Management is a member

of the Deutsche Bank Group.

Ti l n ey Private Wealth Management is a trading name of Ti l n ey

I n vestment Management. Registered in England No. 20105 2 0 .

For further information on how we can help manage your investments to maximum effect, contact

0808 100 4442, or email e n q u i r i e s @ t i l n e y. c o m

Honesty, integrity and independence

Towry Law Financial Services Limited was founded in 1958 and is one of the UK’s most distinctive and respected fi rms of private wealth managers, fi nancial planners and employee benefi ts consultants.

We are wholly independent, both in terms of our actions and our ownership and charge clear and transparent fees. We do not take commission. This means you can be sure that our advice is truly impartial and solely in the best interests of our clients.

We work alongside a number of the pre-eminent law and accountancy fi rms, seeing our services as enhancing those of our professional partners, and vice versa. We also act for many Partners of the top legal and accountancy fi rms with regard to their own personal fi nances.

Our Offering:A compelling proposition for individual investors with investments or pension assets in excess of £100,000Wholly independent and non biased adviceService based approach putting the client fi rstOne of the most experienced investment management teams in the industryLeading asset allocation technology to ensure that portfolios are constructed to meet the objectives and risk profi le of investors Holistic Financial Planning servicesAn open, transparent, fee based charging structure

To fi nd out more about Towry Law, please call 0845 788 9933 or e-mail [email protected]

•

•••

•

••

www.towrylaw.com

TowryLaw_halfpage_180x125.indd 1 31/8/07 12:43:14


It does all rather seem like doom and gloom at the moment. Markets globally are trying to find a sustained direction, and worries over the US economy and the general interest rate position are causing jitters which

are beginning to linger.

This of course has given rise to the usual tide of opposite opinion. Another market adage says that “economists have predicted eight of the last three recessions” and, at present, the bears are receiving airtime, arguing that the current economic uncertainty could have perilous repercussions for markets as a whole.

Then there is the weakness of the US dollar, the possibility of the Chinese market overheating, concerns around the barrage of private equity investment which must surely result in a default, not to mention the ongoing threat to general stability caused by terrorist activities.

What is an investor to make of all this information and, is it time to be running to the hills?

Of course economic and general market indicators are vital and, of course, the current strength or otherwise of the companies in which you are invested is of great importance. There is no question that these factors, in total, provide some factual proof of what has already happened, without necessarily pointing to what might happen in the future.

However, turbulent times in the market provide an opportunity for the investor to go back to basics and make sure that their original aims are still aligned with the current environment.

Perhaps the most obvious at the current time is attitude to risk. Do investors regard themselves as risk averse? Or perhaps low, medium or high risk? Again, there is no steadfast rule, but in general shares will tend to fall into the medium category, certainly the “blue chips”, or well-established companies. The higher risk ones will tend to be those smaller companies who have either yet fully to establish themselves, so-called “fledgling” companies, or perhaps those who operate in a very niche area and are therefore do not benefit from the diversification which can be the saviour of their larger counterparts.

Even within this category of risk, there are different levels. There are, for example, defensive shares which would suffer in a market downturn, but potentially less than cyclical stocks. Whichever part of the economic cycle we are in, there will of course still be the need to eat, heat and treat – which is why the likes of food retailers, oil companies and pharmaceutical firms classically fall into this category. In addition, the utility companies, whilst traditionally being regarded as somewhat dour stocks, often compensate for this by having typically larger dividend yields and, of late, bid speculation has added further interest to their value as investments.This leads to what is usually the second largest question an investor must

ponder – whether they are interested in capital growth or income. Perceived wisdom is that stocks will generally fall into one of two categories, namely either growth or value stocks.

Pure capital growth stocks tend to be found towards the smaller end of the spectrum and are typified by companies which, assuming they are in profit, will be reinvesting this extra capital in an effort to grow the business further. Growth stocks are very much prone to the vagaries of market expectations, as, in particular, information technology and healthcare stocks have often found. Most of them will tend to be on higher earnings multiples and, not surprisingly, continued year on year growth will therefore be expected. Analysts’ forecasts therefore need to be carefully managed, in order to prevent a rout on the shares in the event of a disappointing trading statement or set of numbers, let alone a profits warning.

On the other hand, value stocks tend to have lower expectations placed upon them by the market. They are characterised by lower earnings multiples, and therefore relatively lower share prices and can often be found to be amongst the higher yielding stocks, or income shares. On the whole, these tend to be well established, stable and cash generative companies who should not have difficulty in maintaining future dividends.

There are additional complications when stocks exhibit qualities of both growth and income, although this is of less concern to individual investors than to the funds which have firmly set out their stall in one camp or the other. The utility sector, as mentioned above, is one where the traditional boundaries of growth and income are becoming blurred. Furthermore, more risk averse investors have tended to wards these slightly safer havens after the bear market at the turn of the century, and of course this added buying pressure has provided further upward impetus on share prices.

These are, of course, very general summaries of what high/low risk and capital/income shares might look like. There are a whole host of factors which investors need to be taking into account, especially when investing at stock level, such as the likelihood of strength in future earnings and just which factors differentiate that company from its competitors.

In addition, there is a whole host of fundamental data which investors will consider when comparing similar stocks. These include, inter alia, the price/earnings ratio, the dividend yield, the return on capital employed, and the gearing. Additionally comes the appetite for acquisitions (or even the likelihood of being acquired should the company have reached saturation in its market or, alternatively, should the company find itself in current difficulty).

Space precludes examining each of the fundamentals, but there are a number of killer questions which can separate the successful company from the also-ran.

First things first

“Now is always the most difficult time to invest” – Anonymous

By Richard J Hunter, Head of UK Equities, Hargreaves Lansdown Stockbrokers


PORTFOLIOINSURANCE...

...YOU CAN RELY ON

Nowell & Richards are authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.

At Nowell & Richards Insurance Services we constantly strive to provide new products for our

clients. In conjunction with our key providers we are pleased to deliver a new concept in insurance.

Portfolio Insurance allows you to benefit from a single insurance policy covering your needs in

respect of motor, home, holiday home, yacht and annual travel insurance. We offer interest free

direct debit, exceptional service and much, much more.

To find out more call: 01785 255514Email: [email protected] visit: www.nowellandrichards.co.uk

Nowell and Richards Insurance Services Ltd. Carfax House, 4-5 Ferranti Court, Staffordshire Technology Park, Stafford ST18 0LQ.

What is the company’s unique selling point? Is there sufficient breadth and depth of management experience? Is the company diversified, both geographically and in the services or products in which it deals, in order to be able to withstand different parts of the economic cycle? Are its profit margins comfortable, or under increasingly severe pressure? Can its business be complemented by the ubiquitous use of the internet?

Cynics of the stock market will always point to formerly great FTSE100 companies which perished. Polly Peck, the Maxwell Corporation, BCCI, even Marconi. These are, however, very much the exception rather than the rule. Of course, past performance is no guarantee to the future, but history has shown a return on capital which far outstrips most other asset classes and certainly cash. With dividends reinvested, the picture is even more striking. For example, £100 invested in equities in 1899 would have given a return of £11 764 by the end of 2005. With income reinvested, this figure rises to £1 340 324, over a hundred times greater. (Source – Barclays Capital Equity-Gilt Study 2006).

Before that, however, there are the general rules of engagement. Does the investor have sufficient life cover? Excepting mortgage repayments, are they relatively loan-free? Is there a “rainy day” fund to hand for emergencies (the generally accepted wisdom is that six months’ salary is sufficient)? Is the initial investment of monies an amount which, in theory, the investor could afford to lose?

Once these hurdles have been overcome and the attitude to risk decided, there is then the matter of tax efficiency. ISAs for example provide tax benefits as do SIPPs if the investor is looking much longer term towards pension provision.

It is, however, worth pausing for thought as the markets continue to undergo their current state of alert. If the investor is comfortable with their own investment objectives and, indeed , their own timeframes which will usually be significantly longer than just a few months – it may help to put matters into a more personal perspective.


Traditional investments are usually defined as cash, fixed income, equities and property. ‘Alternatives’ can cover almost any other type of investment, such as hedge funds, structured products, commodities and

private equity, and more esoteric asset classes – for example art, wine, vintage cars, or, more topically, timber.

For the purpose of this article I have chosen to concentrate on some of the main financial Alternative Investments, namely hedge funds, structured products and exchange traded funds (ETFs), with some emphasis on the hedge fund universe as currently is the most topical of these asset classes.

Structured Products are designed to give an investor exposure to different asset classes whilst also providing an element of capital protection. The level of protection is variable and different issues can be ‘structured’ in different ways giving varying degrees of security to the investor.Structured Products try to enhance modest market gains by taking a concentrated view on particular markets using cash or zero coupon bonds to provide the capital guarantee and derivatives to gain the exposure to the relevant index.

Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) are index tracking funds that can spread investments across a large number of holdings (not just equities) that can provide necessary diversification to a portfolio. An ETF can be constructed for almost any index, commodity or basket of commodities. They are very cost effective and are easily tradable.

Hedge Funds are funds that employ a wide variety of investment strategies in order to achieve positive returns in both rising and falling markets. They have an ‘absolute return’ objective and mindset and do not benchmark their performance against either sectors or indices. They are lightly regulated and normally have the flexibility (depending on their underlying investment strategy) to seek to perform well in any market.

Who uses Alternative Investments, and Why?

Structured Products have long been used by institutional investors as a way of both adding diversification to a portfolio and providing pre-determined levels of return or capital protection. Private investors have also recently begun to see the advantages of such an approach. After the bear market in 2001/2003 the public’s appetite for risk diminished sharply and the attraction of instruments that both quantified any potential losses and supposedly guaranteed potential gains grew accordingly. Financial institutions were quick to see a marketing opportunity and the sector has ballooned in size with both specially designed products for professional investors and more retail-oriented offerings for the general public proliferating.

ETFs provide a different service. They are quoted vehicles, easy to deal in (similar to an ordinary equity, but with no stamp duty) and importantly for many investors, easy to sell short. Investors, both professional and private, often ‘take a view’ on different indices, or sectors, or commodities (oil or wheat for example) and using ETFs is a cost-effective way of doing this – both positively (buying long) and negatively (selling short). ETFs also have the advantages of providing diversification within a portfolio at low cost and of giving investors a chance of participating in areas and markets that would otherwise be out of their reach.

There have always been two main reasons for buying Hedge Funds – either preservation of capital or to achieve an above average return. In the early days of the history of hedge funds the ability of funds, with many different investment strategies, to produce significantly above average returns, but often with reduced volatility, attracted high net worth individuals to the sector.

Gradually institutions of all types began to see the advantage of holding hedge funds that gave some participation in rising markets but, more importantly, aimed to preserve capital in falling markets. Consultants started to recommend hedge funds (or funds-of-funds) to their clients as a useful diversification and this process has accelerated since the turn of the century. The performance of many hedge funds during the bear market illustrated their ability, in many cases, to protect on the downside. The overall size of

the universe of hedge funds has grown steadily ever since (even though the recent bull market has moved the spotlight back on to long-only funds with their superior returns in good markets).

Until recently it has been difficult for the general public to find a way to purchase individual hedge funds or funds-of-funds. Offshore registration, harsh tax treatment and lack of information have all caused problems at one time or another. However, since the last bear market this has slowly been changing. Regulators have started to take a more benign view of the hedge fund sector and have recognised the positive merits that can be found for all types of investors. For example there are now funds-of-funds quoted on the London Stock Exchange using a closed-end fund structure. (Unfortunately these have a tendency to often sell at a discount to net assets like many other investment trusts).

This process has progressed to such an extent that a 5% weighting in hedge funds has, for the first time, been included in the APCIMs balanced and growth indices, used by many private client investors either to benchmark their portfolios or to compare their performance.

I mentioned above that regulators have recently been looking more positively at the hedge fund sector. However other commentators, for instance some central bankers and politicians, have a more jaundiced view, blaming hedge funds in general for many of the dislocations that regularly occur in markets worldwide and accusing them of accentuating any problems by their use of strategies such as short selling. The strategies that hedge funds employ to achieve their targeted returns are many and varied. They range from simple long / short equity investing with little or no gearing to very complicated, computer driven market neutral strategies that can perform thousands of trades each day.

The problem with the latter type of fund is that information is often sketchy, the underlying investor sometimes does not really understand what is going on (and as a result tends to panic more quickly, leading to redemptions when the fund has poor performance), gearing is often very high and if things go wrong (for example Long Term Credit Management – LTCM – in 1998) the risk of contagion to other markets can be multiplied several-fold.

We have seen examples of this in recent weeks – for instance funds managed by Bear Sterns and Goldman Sachs. The well-known and well-publicised problems in the sub-prime mortgage market in the United States eventually, and predictably, spilled over into the debt markets and the many sub-sectors of this market. What was not predictable was the effect on some hedge fund managers (and some long-only managers) who found individual issues impossible to either price or trade. Computer-led strategies, further compounded by the use of complicated derivatives and multiple gearing led in some cases to disaster or near-disaster, which then had a negative effect on all world equity markets.

Unfortunately the disasters receive greater publicity than past successes in the media and the hedge fund sector has once again been seen in an unfavourable light, leading again to demands for further transparency on trading and further regulation to be imposed on managers. This is despite the fact that the vast majority of hedge funds were only indirectly affected by the problems.

Conclusion

Alternative Investments are a diverse asset class that by their inclusion in a portfolio provide diversification, often lower the overall volatility of the portfolio, and also often have little or no correlation with the more traditional assets being held.

However investors, both professional and private, need to know and understand exactly what they are buying and financial institutions need to know exactly to whom they are selling their product. Structured Products, ETFs and Hedge Funds can all have a place in a diversified portfolio – but only depending on the job they are being required to do.

iimia plc, 23 Cathedral Yard, Exeter, Devon EX1 1HBt: 01392 475900 f: 01392 498311 e: [email protected]

ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS

What are ‘Alternative Investments’?

By John Hockin, Senior Investment Manager, at iimia Wealth Management


For a number of years, the Government has been trying to ensure that we all pay our “fair” share of the tax burden. This has lead to:

• The threat of retrospective measures in certain areas of tax legislation; and

• The introduction of a disclosure regime for tax avoidance schemes.

The idea of fairness in tax has also recently made its way into the mainstream media, with the GMB Union encouraging Parliament to review how Private Equity is taxed. Throughout all of this, however, debate about the role of an individual’s domicile status for the purposes of UK taxation has largely been absent. Indeed, the Treasury Committee, when publishing their recent interim report on the taxation of Private Equity, merely commented that claims by Private Equity partners to be non-domiciled should be tightly monitored.

Against this backdrop it is, perhaps, difficult not to conclude that establishment of a non-UK domicile ruling is, at least for the time being, the last politically-tolerated area of tax planning. I, therefore, intend to use this article to:

• Briefly outline the rules governing an individual’s domicile status.

• Touch on the tax-planning opportunities available to a non-domiciliary; and

• Review what may be in store for the future.

Overview of Domicile

(a) Individuals

Everyone of us is born with a domicile of origin. A legitimate child born while their father is still alive enjoys a domicile of origin in the country in which his or her father is domiciled at the time of birth. An illegitimate child, or a child born after his or her father has died, inherits the mother’s domicile.

An individual’s domicile of origin continues until a domicile of choice is acquired. There are two necessary criteria in determining whether an individual has moved over to a domicile of choice in the UK. The individual must:

• Actually live in the UK; and• Intend to live here permanently or indefinitely and with no intention to return to live again in the country of the domicile of origin.

The first condition is a simple question of fact. The second issue can be notoriously difficult to prove as anyone seeking to abandon a UK domicile of origin will have discovered. Provided that an individual:

• Has retained ties of sufficient substance with; or

• Has a real determination, rather than mere aspiration, to return home to

the country of his or her domicile of origin

that individual should not acquire a UK domicile of choice.

(b) Married Women

A wife’s domicile is not necessarily the same as her husband’s domicile if the marriage took place after the end of 1973. It is determined by the same factors as for any other individual with an independent domicile.

A woman who married before the beginning of 1974 automatically acquired her husband’s domicile on marriage. So long as the marriage lasts her domicile only alters when there is any change in the domicile of her husband.

Taxation of Income and Gains

For a non-domiciliary considering long-term residence in the UK, the advice is clear – don’t form the intention of residing here permanently. This is because the retention of a foreign domicile is hugely important for any individual wanting to benefit from the special rules governing how their overseas income and capital gains are taxed.

(a) Overseas Investment Income

The general rule is that a non-UK domiciled individual is only taxable on foreign investment income to the extent that it is remitted to, or enjoyed in, the UK. There are, however, two planning points worth mentioning:-

• UK income tax can only be charged on income remitted where the source of the income has not ceased in a previous tax year. For example, interest on an overseas bank account may be remitted free of UK tax providing the account was closed in the previous tax year and, at the time, the interest on the capital investment was isolated in a separate account. It is this so-called “source-cessation” principle which provides a way of avoiding UK tax on remittances of “capitalised” investment income.

• The Courts have upheld that UK income tax should only be charged when money, or a commercially recognised form of money, is received in the UK. As a result the tax authorities accept that a tangible asset (such as a car) purchased outside the UK with foreign income and brought into the UK does not constitute a remittance. This only arises as and when the asset is subsequently sold here.

(b) Overseas Employment Income and Capital Gains

UK tax will only be payable on such income or capital gains if they are actually remitted here. But, the definition of remittance is tighter than that dealing with investment income. A charge to tax will arise on any amounts:

• paid, used or enjoyed in the UK; or

• transmitted or brought in any manner or form to the UK.

The U.K. – A Tax Haven for Non-Domiciliaries?

By David Genders, Senior Tax Partner at Sayers Butterworth LLP and author of The Daily Telegraph Tax

Guide


It, therefore, follows that a tax liability will arise on asset purchases out of foreign employment income or capital gains which are subsequently brought into the UK. Furthermore the “source-cessation” rules do not apply. There is, however, nothing to stop the non-domiciliary using these funds for overseas expenditure.

Many foreign executives come to the UK to work, often for multi-national organisations. From a UK tax perspective it is attractive for such non-domiciliaries to have separate service agreements with overseas and UK employers covering the performance of their employments outside and in the UK respectively. So long as the earnings of the overseas employment are kept offshore, they are outside the scope of UK tax.

But in order to avoid a successful challenge by the tax authorities to a dual contract arrangement it is important, at the very least, to demonstrate that:

• The two employments are separate and distinct with different responsibilities and duties.

• They stand up on commercial considerations.

• No substantive duties on the overseas contract are been carried out in the UK.

Inheritance Tax

For Inheritance Tax purposes only, there are special rules that deem individuals to be domiciled in the UK, irrespective of their actual domicile status, when they have been resident here for 17 out of the last 20 years.

Although a non-UK domiciliary is only subject to Inheritance Tax on UK situs assets, it is payable on the worldwide assets of a “deemed-domiciled” individual subject to the usual exemptions and reliefs.

The creation of an offshore Trust, possibly with an underlying corporate structure, is an attractive tax planning opportunity for:

• A non-domiciliary contemplating a longish period of residence in the UK; or

• An individual living here fast approaching the time when he or she will acquire “deemed-domiciled” status.

Offshore Trusts – Capital Gains Tax

Whilst anti-avoidance legislation introduced in the 1990s has severely restricted the Capital Gains Tax advantages of offshore Trusts for UK domiciled and resident individuals, they remain to be enjoyed by non-domiciled settlors.

Gains realised by offshore Trustees are not liable to Capital Gains Tax provided:

• The settlor is a non-domiciliary; and

• The Trustees are not resident here.

Furthermore capital payments from such Trusts are not taxed so long as the beneficiary is:

• Non-UK resident; or

• Non-UK domiciled even if the distribution is remitted to the UK.

The Future

Even from this brief summary one can see the substantial tax advantages that can be enjoyed by a non-domiciled, but UK resident, individual compared to the rest of the population. The question, therefore, arises as to whether, and for how long, the present regime will continue. A review of the taxation of non-domiciliaries was announced in 2003. The official line is the review continues at the present time.

The Chancellor is in a difficult position. The taxation rules for non-domiciliaries undoubtedly makes the UK an attractive location for wealthy individuals from around the rest of the world, bringing a level of enterprise and spending that may otherwise not be here. On the other hand, public campaigns about “fairness” in tax will only continue to highlight the tax benefits enjoyed by the relative few. Whereas the concept of domicile in tax may have appeared justified in an age of steam, ships and telegrams, it may start to appear anachronistic in an age of modern communications and international travel facilities.

David Genders is Senior Tax Partner at Sayers Butterworth LLP and author of The Daily Telegraph Tax Guide. He can be contacted on 020 7935 8504 or at [email protected].

• Business Accounts & Taxation

• Self Assessment

• Bookkeeping, VAT and Payroll

• Meetings at your home orbusiness premises

• Company formations

• Business plans

Call Veronica Barikor for a free initialdiscussion without obligation on

0208 985 8261or email [email protected]

TaxAssistAccountants

Unit 15, Celia Fiennes House, 8–20 Well St., London E9 7PX


You buy a home for £500,000 – but how much should you insure it for? Standard insurance companies leave that calculation to you; under-estimate and they penalise you by reducing your settlement.

Research by Chubb Insurance shows that nearly 80% of homes in the UK are under-insured - it’s staggering how many astute people put themselves at considerable financial risk.

Nobody relishes a stack of home paperwork after a heavy day at work. But beware the “easy” option of insuring your home with your bank or mortgage lender – you may not have the cover you think you have.

If your home is large, old, special or unique, it’s well worth looking at the now excellent range of specialist “high net worth” policies. Insurers like Chubb, Hiscox, Zurich and AIG have really done their homework to include cover for complex lifestyles and assets – free from small-print exclusions. These are available through specialist brokers who add value with first class service levels and advice, assessing your risks individually (so you don’t pay for cover you don’t need) and acting as your advocate when you make a claim. The whole system is light years ahead of the call centre “computer says no” mentality.

A specialist policy may (or may well not) mean you pay a little more, but a policy that doesn’t pay out when you claim is simply money down the drain. It’s a false economy.

Do I Qualify?In general, if your home is worth £500,000 or more, you’re regarded by insurers as “high net worth”. Below this level you may find the specialist policies less competitive – if price is your sole motivation.

Why do I need a specialist policy?Standard insurance is based on historical statistics. If your home and lifestyle don’t fit with “national average” profiles, you could find yourself:

• Paying too much: many specialist insurers offer lower rates for higher value properties to reflect the care taken – history documents them as lower risk. Why pay for the neglect of others? • Over-insured: the market value of some properties exceeds the rebuild value due to location. Specialist insurers offer an individual appraisal to set accurate rebuild costs.• Significantly under-insured: again, risk appraisals prevent your sums insured being wrong. How can you be expected to know the cost of replacing 18th century floor tiles? Standard policies also limit the sums you can insure.• Having problems getting cover: period, listed and unusual properties are the norm for specialist insurers, and their rates reflect this. • Restricted by warranties: smallprint clauses on occupancy, safes and

alarms can catch you out.• Out of pocket when you make a claim: Listed buildings are protected by law: you may be forced to fund the difference between standard repairs and authentic materials required. Specialist policies may provide extra cover and a survey. Antique jewellery? A standard policy may only allow for repairs/replacement at a high-street jeweller.Stolen antique furniture? It probably can’t be replaced easily. Specialist policies offer a full cash settlement so that you can choose how or whether to replace.Burst pipe under your valuable slate floor? If the plumber has to break through the floor to access it, the resulting damage may not be covered on a standard policy! Damaged the fabric of the building? Non-specialist repairs using inappropriate materials may affect the integrity and value of the property.Depreciation: even after repairs, damaged art and antiques may lose value: specialist policies will reimburse the differenceComprehensive cover Specialist “high net worth” insurance policies offer worldwide “all risks” cover. They are designed for busy folk who can easily overlook the replacement costs of curtains, kitchen equipment, clothing, wine and other incidentals. They also provide for home-working equipment, garden statuary and furniture. Many also include extra covers such as travel insurance, identity fraud, car-jacking, aggravated burglary and stalking.

Time SavingYou can spend hours online searching for insurance – but often you’re comparing apples with oranges. And it’s not even a fun thing to buy! Wouldn’t you rather call someone who knows about you and can take the distress out of the purchase? Using a broker to seek out the most appropriate policy for you can save you immense amounts of aggravation. They will also draw together advisors on security, fire safety, valuations, surveyors, reinstatement value and art/antiques/jewellery collections.

How much do I insure for?The High Net Worth policy package includes essential advice on the sums you need to insure – a good broker understands changing trends and values in the art and antiques market, for example. As well as ensuring comprehensive cover, ongoing individual advice could help reduce your premium – for example, “brown furniture” values have plummeted, so if that constitutes a significant proportion of your assets, your premium should be reduced to reflect the lower sum insured.

If your home is old or unique, repair and restoration costs will be higher than average and you’ll need some advice on insuring for its “reinstatement value”. Conversely, a modern property which has a high market value due to its location may represent a lower reinstatement cost and insurance premium.

“Computer Says No”?

La Playa’s Matthew Mullee explains how the new breed of “high net worth” insurance policies provide

an antidote to call-centre nightmares.


Case study: Would you insure this house for £600,000, or £800,000 or £1.3million?

Most insurance companies leave you to make this decision. The owner bought it for £1.3million and had decided to insure for £600,000. A free specialist appraisal by Chubb Insurance noted the beautiful oak panelling, carved fireplaces and intricate plaster details, swimming pool and conservatory - and assessed the rebuild value at £800,000. Had the house burned down, a standard insurer would only have paid up to £600,000, leaving him £200,000 out of pocket! Some insurers would even cite under-insurance clauses to reject entire claims. On the Chubb policy, the house is now insured for an agreed value of £800,000 – but if a rebuild cost even more after a total loss, then Chubb would pay the extra amount.

ClaimsHigh net worth insurance claims departments are resourced by experts, and pay out settlements without quibble, in full, in cash – no vouchers or “preferred suppliers” who will discount the replacement item for the insurer. This way, you can opt not to replace the item if you prefer – or to wait until you find a suitable replacement, which may take years. The broker should guide you through the claim and in many cases there’s no form-filling at all. Claims settlements are on a “new for old” basis, and valuables and cars are insured for an “agreed value” to avoid any “discussion” at a claim. “Pairs and sets” cover means you can lose one ear-ring and claim for both.

Portfolio PoliciesThe latest thing from the high net worth insurers is the Portfolio Policy, which allows you to insure homes (including holiday homes and rental property), contents, cars and boats on a single policy. As well as reducing your own administration (a single policy and renewal date), you reduce the insurer’s costs and represent a better overall “risk” to them – usually resulting in a lower premium across the board.

You get what you pay for. If insurance is a lip-service issue for you, buy direct online. But if you want real protection and peace of mind, opt for a specialist policy. Don’t let a low premium attract you to substandard insurance which, if it doesn’t pay out your claim, costs you literally thousands of pounds.

Matthew Mullee, Private Client DirectorLa Playa: Insurance with Intelligencewww.laplaya.co.ukT: 01223 200650


Money is the root of all evil is a phrase that we often hear and, although a truncation of the Biblical quotation, it is a thought that can still trouble savers and investors with moral concerns.

Many people may unwittingly be helping to finance the arms trade, environmental destruction or human rights abuse through their bank accounts, life assurance, pension, savings and investment plans. Who can state with confidence that they do not share their bank (and therefore their money) with an arms company, one that uses child labour to manufacture its goods, or a company contributing unnecessarily to climate change?

These are important questions, and every day hundreds of thousands of people who do not apply ethical or social screening to their money are allowing their funds to be used to finance companies and projects they do not support. If your bank, insurance, pension or investment company were to ask you if you would mind them using your money to finance a heavily polluting company, most people would say no. But let's face it, when was the last time you were asked? And perhaps more importantly, when was the last time that you asked that same question of the institutions that look after your financial affairs?

Much of the problem with investing lies with the fact that when the savings, investments or pension payments of thousands of people are pooled together, the money is invested on the stock market. This money will be invested with the sole aim of maximising returns - at any cost. This is your money and your future, but how can you be sure that the future you are investing for is not being compromised by your own investments? The economics of the 'quick buck' do not account for environmental or social sustainability and can be highly destructive. Ethical or Socially Responsible Investment offers the opportunity for investors and savers to invest in companies operating within an ethical framework that reflects their own moral stance and avoid those companies whose activities they would not want to support.

The first ethical investment fund in the UK was launched in 1984 by Friends Provident as a response to the ethical concerns raised by their Quaker roots. Twenty-three years later there are dozens of ethically screened funds from many of the UK's leading fund management groups. Investing ethically is now one of the fastest growing areas in financial planning, with funds in the ethical sector growing from £1bn to over £5bn between 2000 and 2007).

Whatever your concerns - people, planet, animals, faith - there is now an ethical fund that will accommodate your views. The concept of ‘ethical’ will vary between individuals - one man’s meat is, as the saying goes, another man’s poison. In our experience there are certain key moral issues that are beyond the pale for most investors, but beyond these universal ethical red lines, it is possible to apply a more bespoke view upon the manner in which one’s money is invested. This includes, for an increasing number of investors, not just avoiding certain activities, but investing in a positive way to support companies contributing to a sustainable future.

It is a common misunderstanding that ethical funds contain only companies which investors would regard as positive. In reality, the average ethical fund contains many positive investments, but these holdings (most often in quite small companies) are balanced by larger companies deemed to be ‘ethically

neutral’. Criticisms of ethical funds often involve highlighting these ethically neutral companies and asking why they are deemed ethical, while the same commentators show no interest in the important issue of the negative impacts of non-ethical funds. Any comparison between ethical funds and their non-ethical equivalents will quickly highlight to an ethically aware investor that, while the ethical fund is an imperfect solution, it is a significant improvement on the non-ethical alternative, which will inevitably invest in at least one of their areas of concern.

By applying socially responsible or ethical criteria to the use of your money within conventional financial systems one can make a stand for change. It is argued by some that as long as campaigning doesn’t impact the bottom line, very little change will come about. Money and the pursuit of profit are at the heart of our economic culture. Whilst there is nothing wrong with looking for growth from one's money, many draw the line at financing activities they do not support. Participating in this culture, but at the same time applying moral criteria to how your money is used, can encourage a more socially and environmentally progressive outlook in the companies in which you have a stake.

As more people choose to invest according to their principles, the rate of change in corporate attitudes to social responsibility issues will accelerate. The development of an engagement approach by both campaign groups and city fund managers offers the investor further opportunities to make a positive impact. Investing in companies using an engagement policy allows managers to invest in companies with questionable social or environmental probity and encourage them to address their negative impacts. Engagement isn’t going to turn an arms manufacturer into a wind turbine manufacturer, but it has been shown to make a significant difference to a corporate stance in an area where there is an opportunity for significant change, such as reducing a carbon footprint or moving to a Fair Trade supplier.

Time has shown that far from handicapping investment performance, investing ethically can have significant benefits. In a recent paper from Standard Life Investments, they prove that investing ethically has boosted the return on their ethical fund, over and above the equivalent non-ethical funds and the appropriate Indices. A copy of the paper can be found on our web site.

After nearly 20 years advising on ethical investments, it is still interesting to note that far too many investors with social, moral or environmental concerns have yet to make the link between the issues that concern them and the way in which their money is invested. The link is quite simple: if you do not actively choose to invest in a socially responsible manner, some, if not all, of your moral concerns will be compromised by your investments. So, the next time you are reviewing your financial arrangements, - banking, pensions, life assurance, savings, ISAs, PEPs, etc. - take a step back and look at whether your are financing companies whose activities you object to, and whether you would prefer to actively invest in a more positive future for you and your children. It is your money and your choice.

Morals and Money

By Mike Head, Senior Manager Ethical Investments


Why invest?

If you are going to invest, you need to have a clear goal, as investment

without a defined timescale and purpose is a recipe for disaster. Most

people with excess income should have some exposure to “the markets”,

particularly if this exposure is gained through tax-efficient wrappers such

as pensions and ISAs. However, if you have a large mortgage you need to

ask yourself whether overpaying this on a regular basis would be a better

investment? Remember that mortgage payments are paid out of net income

so if your mortgage rate is, say, 6.25% p.a. you need to feel confident that you

can generate a net, risk free return of 6.25% p.a., or 10.42% p.a. gross for a higher

rate taxpayer via a taxable investment, to make investment worthwhile.

There are no management fees or commissions involved in paying down a

mortgage and perhaps this is why too few people are encouraged to do this.

Most people would jump at the chance of a 10% guaranteed return.

When to invest?

A question we often face as financial planners is “which way is the stockmarket

heading?” Whilst we all have our own opinions on this matter, it goes without

saying that no one actually knows.

However, we do subscribe to the view that as we are living in a capitalist

society, individuals are rewarded over the longer term by the market rate of

return for providing capital to companies. If this was not the case, capitalism

as an economic system would have collapsed long ago.

When five year annualised returns of the FTSE All-Share index are looked at

from 1956 onwards, there are only two five year time periods when returns

were negative. These were the periods 1970-1974 when the FTSE All-Share

index fell 20% and 2000-2004 when the market fell 8%. If after the 1970-1974

slump investors had held their cool, they would have been rewarded with a

rise of 151% in 1975.

Two additional benefits to the “buy and hold” strategy are that trading

commissions can minimised and taxes (stamp duty and capital gains tax)

can be reduced or deferred, by buying and selling less frequently.

How to invest?

Once you have decided that investing part of your wealth is a sensible course

of action, you need to decide whether to invest in individual stocks or in

collective funds, such as OEICs, Unit Trusts or Investment Trusts.

We have reviewed the advantages of each method of accessing assets and

conclude that there is no reason to invest in equities directly and that in most

cases the same is true for fixed interest securities. It is virtually impossible

to deliver a tax-efficient, suitably diversified portfolio at a low cost through

direct equity investment. We believe that for most individuals, collectives offer

a much more attractive means of accessing the global financial markets. In

our opinion, buying individual equities is speculation, not investment.

The next decision is whether these funds should be ‘actively’ managed or

whether you should opt for an index tracking approach.

Active fund management is based on two main beliefs. Firstly, that financial

markets are priced inefficiently, so that good fund managers can pick stocks

that are undervalued and secondly, that these same individuals have the

ability to time their investment decisions, in other words, know when is a

good time to buy and when is a good time to sell. This is often referred to

as market timing. There is ample evidence to suggest that neither of these

claims is correct.

The key reason behind our choice of index over active funds is our

overwhelming belief that markets are efficient. This theory says that prices

are always fair and rapidly reflect any relevant information. It does not mean

that prices are always perfect – some prices may be too high and some may be

too low - but there is no reliable way to tell. This means that neither the large

institutions nor the small investor following a tip sheet can systematically

pick winners.

Users of index funds are often accused by active managers of missing out on

huge potential returns. We recommend index funds for the sole reason that

we believe the odds are stacked massively against active managers. We are

yet to come across anyone who can persuade us otherwise.

If the market is taken as a whole, the return of active managers must equal

that of index managers before costs. Once costs are deducted, since index

funds charge significantly less than active funds, they must outperform as

a group.

How much should it cost?

It is easy to trivialise the impact of cost. It is not untypical to hear people

comment that a percent here or there is immaterial. But bearing in mind that

most private clients are investing for the long run, this could not be further

from the truth.

The fundamentals of investing

Investments are inherently quite simple yet their packaging can be extremely complicated. In this

article we will endeavour to dispel some of the myths of investing and at the same time give you some

thought-provoking ideas that the billboards don’t tell you.

By James Norton, Evolve Financial Planning


The fund management industry as a whole is very keen on the concept of

the benefits of compounding and there can be no doubt that it is extremely

powerful. If someone were fortunate enough to have invested £10,000 in the

FTSE All Share when the index was launched in 1962, at the time of writing

this would be valued at over £320,000, representing a compound annual

return of around 8%, excluding dividends.

This is not an unreasonable timescale to consider. Most people start saving

for their retirement in their twenties and may not draw an income until some

time in their sixties.

However, it is important to realise that, say, 8% p.a. is the return of the index

and as costs are involved, few people would be fortunate enough to make

this much. Assuming an index fund has a cost of 0.5% per annum (although

we can often invest for significantly less than this) , the total return would

fall to around £259,000 showing how even modest costs have a significant

impact over a long timescale. When the costs of active managers are taken

into account the position is much worse. Assuming total expenses of 1.5% per

annum (which is very much on the conservative side), the £10,000 invested

in 1962 would only be valued at around £170,000 now. The index return is

a staggering 88% higher than this. Around £150,000 has been eaten up in

costs.

An interesting way of putting cost into context is to measure it as a percentage

of the equity risk premium, i.e., the additional return required by an investor

to compensate them for taking the risk of investing in equities as opposed

to Government bonds. Put another way, it is the difference in the expected

return of equities and a long-dated gilt.

Research suggests that the current equity risk premium stands at around

3.75% p.a. Assuming the average unit trust has total expense ratio of 1.5%

p.a., it accounts for a staggering 40% of the equity risk premium. However,

with a low cost index fund where the total expense ratio might be just 0.5%,

only 13% of the equity risk premium is consumed.

These costs of 1.5% p.a. are conservative. According to Lipper Fitzrovia, in

research published at the end of 2006, the average active equity unit trust

has a total expense ratio of 1.63% p.a. Many investors will have a stockbroker

or investment manager who charges a 1% p.a. management fee on top of this

and then commission on buying and selling funds as well.

The direct consequence of this is that an investor holding active funds will

have to take significantly more risk than an investor holding index funds if

they are to achieve the same return over the long run. Whereas the index

investor can afford to hold a reasonable buffer in fixed income to reduce

volatility, the holder of active funds will have less scope to do this as the

equity component of the portfolio will have to work harder to keep up.

One area that has become of increasing concern to us is that of multi-

managers. There are some very good managers out there who are cost-

conscious, using ETFs and index funds as core holdings, however, the total

expense ratios of most multi managers tend to be in excess of 2% p.a., with

some approaching 3% p.a.. According to the same research article from Lipper

Fitzrovia, the average total expense ratio on multi manager funds stands at

2.2% p.a. This accounts for almost 60% of the current equity risk premium.

As sceptics of active funds, we are not claiming that active managers

cannot do a good job and outperform for a limited period. However, we are

comfortable in missing out on some of the potentially high returns made by

such managers over relatively short timescales, with the knowledge that in

most cases the tortoise will outperform the hare.

To summarise, we believe that markets are efficient, and therefore costs play

a vital part in any investment strategy. Anyone who thinks otherwise should

check the numbers carefully.

James Norton is a director of Evolve Financial Planning. He is both a Chartered

Financial Planner and a Certified Financial Planner. He is also a Chartered

Accountant and a Fellow of the Securities Institute.

Contact Evolve on 020 7378 0990 or by email at [email protected]

The value of investments may go down as well as up and that past

performance is no guarantee of future performance. Taxation may change in

the future. Evolve Financial Planning Ltd is authorised and regulated by the

Financial Services Authority.

UBS

WIDESPREAD OF CONCERN

REGARDING THE LOW LEVEL

OF DAMAGES AWARDED TO

INJURED PEOPLE IN THE UK

In 1999, a Law Commission report

recommended increases

and

improvements to the damages system,

and indicated that if the judiciary

would not make awards fairer, then

parliament should. For the last seven

years Government has ignored the

recommendations and this simply is not

good enough

By Richard Langton, president,

Association of Personal Injury Lawyers

(APIL)

PRISONS FACE RENEWED

CROWDING CRISIS

As a new Home Secretary and a new

ministerial team inquire into the prison

system with more than usual interest they

face a system buckling under immense

pressure, shocking reconviction rates

and a looming overcrowding crisis.

By Juliet Lyon, director of the Prison

Reform Trust

“REFUTING THE

PROSECUTOR’S FALLACY”

The role of expert witnesses in trials

urgently needs to be reviewed if

confidence is to be restored say Geoffrey

Beresford Hartwell, Professor of Law,

expert witness and former Chairman of

the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and

Paul Dougan, academic lawyer from the

Law School at Brunel University

3

ISSN 1468-926X

PRICE

£3.00

June 6th - 31st July 2006

Features

Editor: Nigel Simmonds

0870 766 2715

email: [email protected]

Publishers: Media Management Corporation Ltd

Publishing Director: Derek Payne

Design and Production: Alan Pritchard

Cambridge Printing Park Tel: 01223 423000

#29

p.20

In April 2006 the Secretary of State for

Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor, Lord

Falconer of Thoroton, issued a paper entitled

“Doing Law Differently”. The paper draws

together many of the Government’s policies with

regard to the legal system and seeks to put them

within a coherent framework. The document

is therefore an argument in favour of change.

Incidentally, the document also involves some

innovations in the use of language, thus:

“The law needs to be done; but the

way we do law needs to change. We

need to do law, but we need to do law

differently.”

Any assessment of a policy restatement such

as this needs to start by going back to first

principles. I would suggest that the success

of any justice system is ultimately dependent

upon two main factors. First the way in which

the system balances the interests of the state,

or the community at large, against those of the

individual. Second, the extent to which the

system is resourced. The Lord Chancellor’s paper,

whilst in many respects a very useful and well

written summary,

fails fully, I would

suggest, to address

either of these two

central principles.

Let me first

summarise the

changes which the

paper advocates.

The main areas of

reform are already

well known. They

include the ending

of the role of the

Lord Chancellor

as Head of the

Judiciary, and the establishment of a Supreme

Court for the United Kingdom. Next the paper

refers to changes to the judicial appointments

process. Then the paper contains some

interesting but somewhat general ideas about

changes in the criminal justice system.

The paper discusses also the reforms

emerging from the Clementi Review of

Legal Services, and, finally, the review

Putting profits before people

p.6

News

“Doing Law Differently” Bar Chairman’s Response

TRINITY TERM ISSUE

ESSENTIAL READING FOR BARRISTERS

14

www.barr istermagazine.com

STEPHEN HOCKMAN QC,

Bar Council Chairman

39

Lawtel is the most modern means to ensure that research

into the law includes the very latest decision in any field.

www.lawtel.com

p.21

Bar Council welcomes thrust of

draft Legal Services Bill but raises

concerns over important issues of

detail

ILEX secures extended rights of

audience for its members

Est. 1999

“It is not appropriate for people to profit out of

incarceration”

So said Jack Straw in 1995. He was speaking

about the then Conservative Government’s policy

of allowing private companies to run prisons.

As in other areas, principle in opposition was

not translated into government policy. On the

contrary, the Labour Government has proved to

be a more passionate privatiser in the criminal

justice field than the Tories. The latest intention

being, to use the approved euphemism, the

‘contracting out’ – or privatisation, to you and I

– of community probation services.

The first privately run British prison, HMP The

Wolds, opened in 1992. There are now 10

others in England Wales, 9 of which have opened

since 1997. The Home Office claims that the

involvement of private operators has encouraged

innovation and has helped to improve standards

right across the prison estate by challenging the

public sector prisons to up their game. There

is no real evidence for this assertion. What the

private corporations who run these prisons have

been good at is making money (the perfectly

legitimate aim of every business). Cost cutting

is what they know, so the salary of officers in

private prisons is up to a third less than that

of officers in public sector prisons (despite the

fact that they will be dealing with the same

prisoners) and they shave costs by employing far

fewer of them. The real saving is on pensions,

so that no only do staff have low wages in the

private prisons but they will face old age with a

minimal pension. This cost-cutting has had very

real implications for the conditions in which

prisoners are held.

The one area where private prisons could have

made a difference is in overcrowding. They

could have made a stand against the degrading

treatment of packing people ever more tightly

into jails but instead they chose not to: more

prisoners in the market means more

profit and they had no intention of

missing out.

Private prisons also benefit from

p.42

Jacqueline Thomson of

Smith & Williamson, the

accountancy and financial

advisory group, explains how

recent changes to trusts

are affecting inheritance tax

planning for many families

Personal Finance

Supplement

22page

The golden rule when buying

fine art and antiques is to

buy something because you

like it, but do remember that,

like the stock market, fine art

and antiques can fluctuate in

value.

4page

The Alternative Investment

Market (AIM) may have

started life as a minnow, but

it now represents 82% of

all new companies coming

to the market this year and

boasts a market capitalisation

of £74 billion.

page

12

Immunity For Experts-

A Step Too Far

DNA evidence in the

court room

2Why experts need

training

5 22

CURIOUS TIMES FOR CRIMINALJUSTICE

What is going on? Why, during a period of rapidly falling official crime levels is criminal justice apparently mired in almost permanent crisis? Are ministers right about criminal justice failure? If so, what are the implications?

By Richard Garside, Acting Director, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, King's College

THINKING ACROSS THE DIVIDELord Carter’s report heralds a revolution in the way legal aid services are procured. Solicitors and barristers have each been looking at the implications for themselves, but to date there has been little consideration of the impact on the relationship between the two branches of the legal profession.

By Richard Miller, director, LAPG

PUNISHMENT, PENANCE AND IMPACT: THE VAGARIES OF SENTENCING POLICY.Sentencing has never been so popular a media issue as during the summer of 2006. What has not surfaced is a reasoned discussion of sentencing principles and penal policies.

By Professor Christine Piper, School of Social Sciences and Law, Brunel University

8

ISSN 1468-926X

PRICE£3.00

October 2nd - December 21st 2006

Features

Editor: Nigel Simmonds0870 766 2715email: [email protected]: Media Management Corporation LtdPublishing Director: Derek Payne

Design and Production: Alan PritchardCambridge Printing Park Tel: 01223 423000

#30

p.20

The Draft Legal Services Bill carries forward most of the recommendations of Sir David Clementi’s Review of the Regulatory Framework for Legal Services. Its aim is to put consumers of legal services at the heart of regulation.The Bill sets out a number of key features of the legal system, which must be upheld under the new regime. These include supporting the rule of law, improving access to justice, protecting and promoting the interests of consumers, promoting competition and promoting adherence to the professional principles. These principles include independence and integrity, the duty to act in the best interests of clients and confidentiality. These are crucial principles for any legal system.If implemented, the Bill will establish a Legal Services Board to oversee the work of the “approved regulators” (called “Front Line Regulators” by Clementi). These approved regulators must ensure that their regulatory

work is free from influence by their r e p r e s e n t a t i v e activities.

The Bar Council is to be an approved regulator and has already taken action to separate these functions. The Bar Standards Board was established at the beginning of this year to take over the Council’s regulatory work. The membership was appointed on Nolan principles and has no connection with the representative side. The Board’s remit is to act in the public interest. The Council is to be congratulated on setting us up so quickly. This will ensure that we will be running with full effectiveness Criminal Justice: Another Major Overhaul

p.6

News

The Legal Services Bill: The Bar Standards Board Perspective

MICHAELMAS TERM ISSUE

ESSENTIAL READING FOR BARRISTERS

12

www.barr istermagazine.com

RUTH EVANS Chair of the Bar Standards Board.

14

Lawtel is the most modern means to ensure that researchinto the law includes the very latest decision in any field.www.lawtel.com

p.21

UK Government urges South Africa to open up legal services market

LAPG launches Carter discussion forum

Est. 1999

On 20th July, Home Secretary, John Reid, announced the latest reorganisation, or ‘rebalancing’ as he called it, of the criminal justice system ‘in favour of the law abiding majority’.The rebalancing is based on five key priorities: protecting the public from violent crime; putting victims and communities first; building public confidence in sentencing; a tighter grip on all offenders; and simple, speedy, summary justice.The document, which is over 40 pages long, contains 24 new proposals. This is just three short of the record set by Michael Howard, in the mid-90s, when he announced a rebalancing of the system.

The main points in the paper include an additional 8,000 new prison places; unanimous decisions by the Parole Board before prisoners are released; that Parole Board members should have experience of being a victim; no automatic third-off discounts for guilty pleas; the end to automatic release at the half-way point on those sentenced to four years or more; the introduction

of bulk processing centres for minor offenders; parental compensation orders for those with children aged 10-years-old or under who commit criminal damage; speeding up the return to custody of serious offenders who breach the conditions of their licence; and extending community service.

The document itself contains no less than 34 references to the word ‘tough’ or ‘tougher’. This contrasts markedly to just one reference to causes of crime, and that is a reference to Hilary Armstrong’s responsibility for the Social Exclusion Unit and the need for liaison. More reform

This is the third major attempt by New Labour to reform the criminal justice system. The first attempt was in 1997, with the publication of the Crime and Disorder Act, which introduced ASBOs, parenting orders, extended curfews, sex offender orders, drug treatment orders and the set-up of the youth justice system. It

p.30

Need a Reason to Subscribe?

– Need any more?I wish to take out a subscription to the barrister:

To subscribe, please fill in this form and send to: Media Management Corporation Ltd, 21a-23a Dudden Hill Lane, London NW10 2ET.

Surname Forename

Company/Chambers/University

Address

Postcode/ZIP

Telephone No. Fax No.

E-mail

I wish to subscribe to the barrister for 1 year

I enclose a cheque for

made payable to: Media Management Corp Ltd / Invoice my company

Signature

Date

Method of Payment: Cheques, Payment Orders, Money Orders.

Subscription Rates(Air mail except U.K.)

1 Year

UK £20

Europe C40

U.S.A./Canada $35

Rest of the world £35

personal finance & wealth management supplement the barrister 2007UBS Wealth Management is a trading name of UBS AG, which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. © UBS 2007. All rights reserved.

You & Us We bring global resources to the issues that matter. Yours.

At UBS Wealth Management, we understand that success is the product of design, not destiny. So, with the knowledge

and resources of a global network we craft an investment portfolio together. We customise your portfolio to meet your

needs and aspirations, harnessing some of the most advanced products and services in the financial world. And then

monitor it continually, providing advice that is proactive, not reactive. UBS Wealth Management means having one of

the world’s most powerful wealth managers right next to you. A relationship we call “You & Us”.

For information about UBS in the UK,

please contact Philip Smith on 020 7567 7070.

www.ubs.com/uk


ch e v i o t . c o . u k

Cheviot Asset Management is an independent partnership. We believe that’s

what helps us offer truly objective advice, tailored to your individual needs. It’s

also one of the reasons so many new clients have joined us over the past year.

Find out what our independence can do for you by calling Bernadette Duffey

on 020 7845 6161 or Charlie Macfarlane on 020 7438 5688.

Cheviot Asset Management Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority and is a member fi rm of the London Stock Exchange. Registered in England Number 1754391. Registered offi ce: 90 Long Acre, London WC2E 9RA.

“Our independence is fundamental to the quality and integrity of the service we offer.”

Michael Kerr-Dineen, Chief Executive

Welcoming

private clients

1501-Cheviot-Private-A4.indd 1 24/8/07 15:12:11

document

Documents

tax benefits

tax year

tax advantage

mainstream tax sheltersthese

taxefficient way

underlying investment

investment risk

mediocre investment